Skip to main content

Boundary Disputes

‘Good fences make for good neighbours.’ Boundary disputes are a common cause of friction between neighbours. Aside from the situation of the ‘land grab’ – where one neighbour simply seizes land from the other – the most common cause arises from the mistaken belief that the plan filed at the Land Registry (called the ‘Title plan’) is the final arbiter of where the boundary lies: it is not.

For Example

A new owner moves into his house. His solicitor gives him the title plan used on the conveyance. The new owner is bored, gets the plan out, calculates how wide his garden should be from the plan and measures out how wide it actually is. Lo and behold, the two are different! If his garden were as wide as that on the plan he would have a two-foot strip of his neighbour’s garden. Armed with this knowledge he tells his neighbour to move the fence. His neighbour is having none of it. He is off to see his legal expenses insurers. Hey, presto! We have a full-blown boundary dispute.

The dispute will take two years to reach court. The atmosphere between the neighbours will become awful; both properties will become unsaleable. And the situation has come about through a misunderstanding of the rules governing boundaries. In fact, the Title plan is not determinative. It is subject to the General Boundary Rule: that boundaries on plans are just general boundaries.

What will govern the actual position of the boundary will be 4 things:

  • The contract of sale: was there a parcel clause stating exactly the dimensions?
  • The plan used on first registration: does this specify the boundary?
  • The physical features: is there a ditch or wall which historically delineated the boundary?
  • Adverse possession: for how long has the disputed strip been fenced in by the putative owner? For adverse possession to trump all of the above the owner will have to demonstrate physical possession (not mere use) for 12 years prior to October 2003.

What I can do

My approach is collaborative. I try to bring all parties and their lawyers together as soon as possible to sketch out the various alternatives. Nine times out of ten good sense, diplomacy and mutual respect will achieve a compromise.