Land had been divided into three lots on its development, but the site plan did not match the line of a fence actually erected.
Held: The court was not bound by the Watcham case, and would not follow it to allow reference to the later behaviour of parties in interpreting a deed. The court related the conveyance plan to the features on the ground and concluded that, on the facts, the dominant description of the boundary of the property conveyed was red edging in a single straight line on the plan.
The judge had been incorrect in not allowing the defendant to plead an estoppel. However there had been insufficient detriment suffered to establish an estoppel, and the defence failed. The appeal was dismissed.
Peter Gibson LJ
[2003] EWCA Civ 1883, [2004] 2 PandCR 18
Bailii
Land Registration Act 1925 70(1)(g)
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Lyle v Richards HL 1866
A lease described the southern boundary of the premises as ‘a straight line of about 355 fathoms from John Vincent’s house . . to a bound-stone’, which was then described, the demised premises being ‘particularly delineated by the map’, that map . .
Cited – Eastwood v Ashton HL 1915
Toi Identify Land, Court to Find True Meaning
A contract described the property and referred to a plan attached. The conveyance used four indications: the farm sold was said to be called by a given name, to contain 84 acres odd ‘or thereabouts’, and to be in the occupation of two different . .
Cited – Wickham Tools v Schuler AG HL 1974
Lord Wilberforce referred to the Watcham case as: ‘a precedent which I had thought had long been recognised to be nothing but the refuge of the desperate.’ but ‘Whether in its own field, namely that of interpretation of deeds relating to real . .
Not Followed – Watcham v Attorney-General of the East Africa Protectorate PC 1919
The Watchams held land along the bank of the Nairobi River. It had been conveyed to them by the Crown by a certificate under the East African Land Regulations. The certificate gave the area transferred as ’66 3/4 acres, or thereabouts’, but included . .
Cited – AJ Dunning and Sons (Shopfitters) Ltd v Sykes and Son (Poole) Ltd CA 1987
A transfer of part of land identified the land by reference to a red line on a plan being part of a registered. The court held that the seller’s covenants of title implied under the rules took effect subject to the interests of the registerd owners . .
Cited – Sussex Caravan Parks Ltd v Richardson CA 1961
Harman LJ described the Watcham case: ‘a case which has been long under suspicion of the gravest kind from real property lawyers.’ . .
Cited – Jennings v Rice, Wilson, Marsh, Norris, Norris, and Reed CA 22-Feb-2002
The claimant asserted a proprietary estoppel against the respondents. He had worked for the deceased over many years, for little payment, and doing more and more for her. Though he still worked full time at first, he came to spend nights at the . .
Cited – Gillett v Holt and Another CA 23-Mar-2000
Repeated Assurances Created Equitable Estoppel
Repeated assurances, given over years, that the claimant would acquire an interest in property on the death of the person giving the re-assurance, and upon which the claimant relied to his detriment, could found a claim of equitable estoppel. The . .
Cited – Whitworth Street Estates (Manchester) Ltd v James Miller and Partners Ltd HL 1970
The parties disagreed as to the curial law of an arbitration agreement. The proper law of the building contract and the arbitration agreement was English but the reference was conducted in Scotland.
Held: Evidence of behaviour after a contract . .
Cited by:
Cited – Ali v Lane and Another CA 21-Nov-2006
The parties disputed the boundary between their neighbouring plots of land.
Held: In the modern law the conveyance (parchment or not) is undoubtedly the starting point. Where information contained in the conveyance is unclear or ambiguous, it . .
Cited – Piper and Another v Wakeford and Another CA 17-Dec-2008
The parties disputed the boundary between their land.
Held: The judge had been entitled to rely on the evidence he had accepted, and had been entitled to find on the factual basis asserted. . .
Cited – Pennock and Another v Hodgson CA 27-Jul-2010
In a boundary dispute, the judge had found a boundary, locating it by reference to physical features not mentioned in the unambigous conveyance.
Held: The judge had reiterated but not relied upon the statement as to the subjective views of the . .
Cited – Dixon and Another v Hodgson and Others CA 20-Dec-2011
The parties were in a boundary dispute. The court warned of the danger of deciding where a boundary is by simply relying on the physical appearance of the ground features to the neglect or exclusion of the title documents. The Recorder had found . .
Cited – Cameron v Boggiano and Another CA 21-Feb-2012
The parties disputed the boundary between their neighbouring properties. . .
Cited – Taylor v Lambert and Another CA 18-Jan-2012
The court heard an appeal against a judgment in a boundary dispute, the losing party having latterly dicovered aerial photopgraphs. There appeared to be a difference between the total area as specified in a 1974 conveyance off of part and the area . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Land, Registered Land, Estoppel
Updated: 06 December 2021; Ref: scu.191206