With respect, I do not agree that the decision in James v. Brock can be so limited. While the language used by Macdonald J. in that case was not as clear as it might have been, I interpret his remarks as attributing "the side entrance" to the plaintiff's basement as a lasting improvement. The plaintiff's building was entirely on his own lot. The sidewalk encroached three inches upon the defendant's property. Evidently Macdonald J., in referring to "the side entrance", was not referring to the building itself, for there was no question of its being a lasting improvement on the defendant's property. What he evidently meant by "the side entrance" was the approach to the side door along the sidewalk, part of which encroached upon the defendant's property and was a "lasting improvement" on it.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.