Boundary Disputes: Whose Line is it Anyway?

Boundary disputes are one of the most common issues referred to property litigators. Neighbours live side by side amicably, sometimes for decades before something changes – an extension is built, a fence removed and replaced in a different location – and a dispute arises.

The problem is exacerbated when the exact legal boundary between two pieces of land is poorly (if at all) defined. This is more often an issue for rural properties and older developments, where it is not uncommon to find that the deed plan has been drawn with all the accuracy and skill of a primary school art project.

In such cases, parties regularly assume they can rely on HM Land Registry plans for their respective properties to support their view of where the boundary lies. This, however, is rarely the case. Unless the boundary has previously been determined by agreement or by application, HM Land Registry only records “general boundaries” on the title plans for each registered title. Depending on the version of the Ordnance Survey map used in preparing the title plan, a general boundary is (as a rule of thumb) accurate to within one or two metres each way.

So, if the title plans are no help, then what? The position is relatively easy when there is a single established boundary feature that sits more or less where the plan shows the boundary to be. But what if there are several competing boundary features – for example, a fence, next to a ditch, next to a hedge that has spread and grown?

Over the years, the law has developed a blended approach to determining the location of legal boundaries. The first port of call is the original document that establishes the boundary between the two properties; both the words in the document that describe the boundary (known as the “parcels clause”) and the plan attached. Assuming that this is not sufficient to work out where the legal boundary lies, “extrinsic evidence” will become relevant. This can take many forms: old photographs showing previous boundary structures that have since been moved, plans to more recent conveyances, witness evidence from neighbours and existing physical features. All play a part in evidencing where the boundary was intended to fall.

Finally, where the extrinsic evidence is not clear, a set of presumptions have been developed to deal with some common scenarios. One of the more often used is the “hedge and ditch” rule – the presumption is that where there is a hedge running immediately parallel to a ditch, the legal boundary is on the lip of the ditch furthest from the hedge. These presumptions, however, are not determinative and can be overridden by evidence that the boundary was intended to be somewhere else.

Because every boundary is different, it is impossible to give general purpose guidance about the exact location of a legal boundary. In the event of a boundary dispute arising, getting early and competent legal advice is crucial.

 

Meet the author: Catherine Gritt, Associate Partner

 

This information does not represent legal or tax advice. Seek appropriate legal or tax advice about the topics covered, specific to individual circumstances, before taking or refraining from any action.