A boundary line which the parties had agreed and marked out could supersede a plan on a conveyance expressly said to be for identification only. Lord Denning: ‘It seems to me that the line of white stakes with the white peg in the south-east corner and the post and wire fence at the north-east corner, were physical features on the land showing what was being sold. The plan on the conveyance was for the purpose of identification only. If it were an exact delineation there would be some difficulty in regard to the northerly northern boundary. It would run along the hedge and trees and would make the northern boundary four to six feet further north of the post and wire fence. But as the plan is only for the purpose of identification, I think we can ignore that discrepancy. On the land itself the metes and bounds of this property were sufficiently shown so that anyone looking at the land at the date of the conveyance could have seen perfectly well what was being sold.’
Judges:
Denning LJ
Citations:
March 8 1957 CA Bar Library Transcript No 84
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Applied – Willson and Another v Greene and Another ChD 10-Nov-1970
A plot of land had been originally sold after being pegged out, but the conveyance plan differed from the line pegged out. The land was again sold with a plan on both contract and conveyance still being incorrect. In each case the plan had been used . .
Cited – Willson v Greene (Moss third party) ChD 1971
The court could take into account objective surrounding circumstances indicating where the boundary line had been agreed and marked out by the parties. Thus extrinsic evidence of where the land was identified by pegs was admissible and the extrinsic . .
Cited – Stephenson 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 . .
Cited – Lovering and Another v Atkinson and Others PC 18-May-2020
(Court of Appeal of Guernsey (Civil Division)) Conveyancing dispute between the partners of a firm of advocates and notaries public and their clients as to whether AFR were negligent in allowing their clients to purchase a residential property with . .
Cited – Semple v Anthony and Anthony (Evidence) LRA 13-Jan-2012
LRA Determined Boundary – whether title plans determinative of the boundary between car-parking spaces – whether extrinsic evidence admissible as an aid to the construction of the transfers – whether the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Land
Updated: 18 August 2022; Ref: scu.181804