Hawkes v Howe: CA 29 Jul 2002

The parties were neighbours. One asserted that the other had trespassed in a building by 2.5 inches. The defendant appealed an award of damages. A garage had been built over the boundary by a previous occupier but by agreement. The new owner replaced the garage. He claimed to have acquired the land by prescription.
Held: The judge had failed to make an essential finding on an issue as to the adverse possession, and the matter ought to have been reheard. However the overriding objective required a proportional approach, and a rehearing would prejudice the parties. An order was made reducing the damages, in the hope that this would conclude the matter.
There is sometimes said to be a rebuttable presumption that an owner of land will put the posts on his own land so that the fence stands on the boundary.

Judges:

Mr Justice Sumner, Lord Justice Keene

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 1136

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedStephenson and Another v Johnson and Another CA 12-Jul-2000
There had been a dispute as to the correct boundary between two properties in North Yorkshire. The land had been in common ownership until 1973. The 1973 conveyance showed the boundary in a position which the claimants said was determinative. The . .
CitedNeilson v Poole ChD 1969
Significance of Boundary agreements
The parties, neighbours, disputed the boundary between their gardens. In a conveyance of land where the plan is stated to be for identification purposes only, the effect of those words: ‘Seems . . to confine the use of the plan to ascertaining where . .

Cited by:

CitedWitt v Woodhead UTLC 18-Nov-2020
No determined Boundary – Court Findings Enough
Land Registration – Boundary Disputes – Construction of Conveyance – Straight Line Boundary – usefulness of computer-generated lines – party wall – fence posts
Held: ‘It should be borne in mind that a carefully-drawn conveyance plan showing a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Limitation

Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.174421