In a boundary dispute, extrinsic evidence was not admissible to contradict, in this, case the transfer with an annexed plan, which clearly showed the boundary as a straight line and even contained a precise measurement of distance.
References: [2003] EWCA Civ 1877
Links: Bailii
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
This case cites:
- Cited – Scarfe v Adams CA 1981 ([1981] 1 All ER 843)
Transfer deeds for a sale of land did not define the boundary but referred to a plan which was held to be too small to show a precise boundary. The only other element of the parcels clause was that it was land adjoining Pyle Manor and that it was . .
This case is cited by:
- Cited – Pennock and Another v Hodgson CA 27-Jul-2010 (, [2010] EWCA Civ 873)
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 – Taylor v Lambert and Another CA 18-Jan-2012 (, [2012] EWCA Civ 3)
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 . .
These lists may be incomplete.
Last Update: 22 September 2020; Ref: scu.242462 br>