Boundaries And The Interpretation Of Conveyances: Myths And Legends
|
|
- Jack Park
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Boundaries And The Interpretation Of Conveyances: Myths And Legends The aim of this seminar is to examine a number of commonly held misconceptions about boundary interpretation the myths - and to look at one or two legends along the way. Myth 1: General boundaries Take the following, all-too familiar scenario: Neighbour X sees that the fence separating him from Neighbour Y does not accord with the plan of his title filed at HM Land Registry. According to this plan it appears that his garden should be 9 inches wider. While Neighbour Y is on holiday, Neighbour X moves the fence, repositioning it along the correct line. Neighbour Y returns from holiday and is incensed. A dispute ensues. Neighbour X engages a surveyor to plot the boundary for him. The surveyor scales measurements off the filed plan and confirms his client s view that the fence is now correctly located. Neighbour Y does not accept this, and engages his solicitor. Depending on the precise facts, Neighbour X may well be correct. But his approach is an extremely risky one to take. It is the risk faced by anyone who places total reliance on filed plans, or indeed any plan (such as a conveyance plan) which does not contain precise measurements from clear and existing datum points. It is surprising how many surveyors still focus on scaling measurements off small plans as the be-all and end-all of boundary disputes. Neighbour X, and his surveyor, have been taken in by the myth that registered boundaries are somehow definitive. They have overlooked, or failed to appreciate, the general boundaries rule, set out in s.60 of the Land Registration Act 2002: (1) The boundary of a registered estate as shown for the purposes of the register is a general boundary, unless shown as determined under this section. (2) A general boundary does not determine the exact line of the boundary So the filed plan is usually no more than representational. It is usually drawn to a very small scale and cannot show matters of detail. Conveyance plans usually suffer from the same affliction, and have the added difficulty of often being expressed to be for identification purposes only. So anyone seeking to ascertain the legal boundary normally has to look well beyond it. 1
2 Judicial Legend: Mummery LJ Mummery LJ attempted to distil many of the important principles of boundary construction into a series of easy-to-follow principles in Pennock v Hodgson [2010] EWCA Civ 873. He said (and I paraphrase) that: 1. The starting point is to identify the conveyance which first separated the relevant properties the root conveyance. 2. It is necessary to then interpret that conveyance, especially any description of the properties in the parcels clause and any plan that is attached. He drew attention, however, to the dangers of over-reliance on plans. Like any question of construction, the task is to identify the intentions of the parties to the root conveyance. 3. If the parcels clause is unclear, the precise boundaries must be established by other evidence. That includes inferences from evidence of relevant physical features of the land existing and known at the time of the root conveyance. 4. There is no reason for preferring a line drawn on a plan, even an Ordnance Survey plan, to other relevant evidence. This is a very useful starting point for anyone dealing with a boundary issue. For that reason, Mummery LJ gets my vote as a judicial legend! Extrinsic or background evidence is thus often useful, indeed often decisive. In our Neighbours X and Y example, the background material may be evidence about the location of the fence at the time of the root conveyance, perhaps from a predecessor in title or from an old photograph. Myth 2: Extrinsic evidence is always admissible A view sometimes encountered is that extrinsic evidence is always admissible in the construction of a conveyance, even if terms of the conveyance are clear. This is a myth. For many years the conventional wisdom was that extrinsic evidence cannot be used if the terms of the conveyance are clear. Thus, in Scarfe v Adams [1981] 1 ALL ER 843 Griffith LJ concluded that: "The principle may be stated thus: if the terms of the transfer clearly define the land or interest transferred extrinsic evidence is not admissible to contradict the transfer. In such a case, if the transfer does not truly express the bargain between vendor and purchaser, the only remedy is by way of rectification of the transfer." In more recent times, there was a tendency to doubt this approach, permitting a contextual interpretation in all cases. This approach seems to have been encouraged by the speeches of Lord Hoffman in Mannai Investment Co. Ltd v Eagle Star Life Assurance Co. Ltd [1997] AC 749 and ICS Ltd v West Bromwich BS [1998] 1 WLR
3 In Mannai, Lord Hoffman said this: The fact that words are capable of a literal application is no obstacle to evidence which demonstrates what a reasonable person with knowledge of the background would have understood the parties to mean, even if this compels one to say that they used the wrong words. In Partridge v Lawrence [2003] EWCA Civ 1121 Peter Gibson LJ referred to Scarfe v Adams (above),and said this: "With respect to the judge, the way he expresses the principle may not do sufficient justice to the now recognised principle, as stated by Lord Hoffman, that one construes a document against the background knowledge which would have been available to the parties. To that extent extrinsic evidence is always admissible." In Adam v Shrewsbury [2005] EWCA Civ 1006 Neuberger LJ also appeared to suggest that there should always be a contextual approach to construction. That this view is wrong, now appears to have been settled by a string of more recent cases. It is now clear that, at least in relation to conveyances, extrinsic evidence is not admissible to contradict clear terms. Thus, in Ali v Lane [2007] 1 EGLR 71 Carnwath LJ said this: In the modern law the conveyance is undoubtedly the starting point. It is only to the extent that it is unclear that extrinsic evidence may have a place. Similar views were expressed in Bradford v James [2008] BLR 538, Pennock v Hodgson [2010] EWCA Civ 873 and most recently of all in Norman v Sparling [2014] EWCA Civ 1152.It is now considered to be settled by authority that extrinsic evidence is not admissible if the terms of the conveyance are clear. In reality, however, there will be very few cases where the terms of the conveyance are so clear that a judge will refuse to admit extrinsic evidence. If the terms of the conveyance leave no room for doubt, the parties are unlikely to be in dispute about them. Myth 3: Subsequent conduct as extrinsic evidence Neighbour Y wants to adduce the following evidence: That the boundaries depicted in the root conveyance were considered to be unclear by the parties to it, so they went out and put posts in the ground at intervals where they intended the boundary to be. Some of the original posts still exist in the fenceline. Neighbour X s solicitor objects that this is evidence of subsequent conduct, and thus inadmissible as an aid to construe the contract. Neighbour X s solicitor is perpetuating another myth. It is correct that subsequent conduct is generally inadmissible to interpret a contract, but conveyances are thought to be in a special category of contracts that are not bound by this rule. In the above example, it would be an absurdity if the evidence was not admissible, as it was clear evidence of what the parties intended. 3
4 The leading case is Watcham v East Africa Protectorate [1919] AC 533, in which the Privy Council relied on evidence of the African land subsequently occupied by the Watcham family in order to construe the meaning of a conveyance which was contradictory as to the extent of the land sold to them. For many years, however, the principle underlying Watcham was widely criticised. More recently, doubts about it were expressed in Beale v Harvey [2004] 2 P & CR 18, where Peter Gibson LJ said this: "As for the argument based on subsequent conduct, I confess that I find strange the notion that the true intention of the parties to Mrs Harvey's Transfer as to what they intended to be the boundary line between their properties should be ascertained by reference to what the parties did in the first few months after the Transfer at a time when it had not been pointed out, nor had it occurred to either of them, that the wall and fence had been wrongly positioned. The authority relied on by Mr Ball for the admissibility of such evidence is the Privy Council decision in Watcham... Watcham on this point runs counter to the decisions of the House of Lords that subsequent actions cannot be legitimately used to interpret a written agreement." What Peter Gibson LJ was failing to recognise, however, was that whilst evidence of subsequent conduct may be inadmissible to construe documents in general, the rule was reasonably well established that conveyances were an exception. The approach in Watcham was thus applied by Megarry J in Neilson v Poole [1969] 20 P & CR 909, who said: "Yet modern conveyances are all too often indefinite or contradictory in their parcels. In such circumstances, to reject any evidence afforded by what the common vendor has done in subsequent conveyances seems to me to require justification by some convincing ground of judicial policy; and I have heard none." Peter Gibson LJ was also apparently forgetting his own earlier judgment in Clarke v O'Keefe [1997] 18 P & CR 126, in which he said that ignoring evidence of the parties' subsequent conduct would be "somewhat absurd"! More recently still, in Ali v Lane, Carnwath LJ concluded as follows: "The conclusion I would be inclined to draw from this review is that Watcham remains good law within the narrow limits of what it decided. In the context of a conveyance of land, where the information contained in the conveyance is unclear or ambiguous, it is permissible to have regard to extraneous evidence, including evidence of subsequent conduct, subject always to that evidence being of probative value in determining what the parties intended." This now seems to be a settled approach: see Piper v Wakeford [2008] EWCA Civ 1378 and, most recently of all, Norman v Sparling [2014] EWCA Civ In the latter case, the evidence of subsequent conduct was not only ruled admissible but decisive. Elias LJ held as follows: "The boundary itself cannot be precisely determined from the terms of the deed and therefore it is legitimate to see how the parties to the original deed conducted 4
5 themselves with respect to the property. The evidence was that Mr Birch, having gifted the property, sought thereafter to mark the boundary of the land he had gifted without any objection from his mother. Subsequently he allowed Mr Norman to plant bushes and other plants on his side of the bank without objection. He also, at the time of the conveyance of Arnwood from his mother to the Normans, put posts along the top of the bank to indicate the boundary line. In my judgment, this is highly probative evidence which justifies the judge's conclusion that the top of the bank marks the boundary." It is worth stressing the limitations on the permissible use of extrinsic evidence, whether it be contemporaneous or evidence of subsequent conduct. As we have seen, it cannot be used to contradict the clear words of a conveyance. Furthermore, it must be truly probative. If a boundary is fixed at a point in time, it will only be probative to admit evidence of physical features established on a subsequent date if there are grounds to conclude that the later features replaced original ones that existed when the boundary was fixed. Furthermore, the evidence must always be probative of the intentions of the original parties to the root conveyance. In Ali v Lane, Carnwath LJ left open the question of whether evidence of long and unchallenged conduct by later parties can ever be probative. To illustrate these points, consider a recent case in Birmingham in which I was involved. According to the root conveyance plan, the side wall of the claimant's house was 12 inches inside the boundary, which made sense because it allowed for the construction of eaves and footings without trespassing on the next door property. But there was evidence that subsequent owners of both properties had later granted each other reciprocal easements, and in the deed of easement there was a reference to the boundary being the side wall itself. The defendants relied on this subsequent conduct to assist their interpretation of the boundary line. The claimants countered that the evidence was not probative it did not reveal the intentions of the original parties and the purpose of the deed of easement was to grant reciprocal rights of drainage etc., not to define the boundary. There was no evidence that either party had given any thought as to precisely where the boundary may have been. It was probably no more than an assumption that the side wall marked the boundary. The case settled at trial, but it is considered that the claimant's argument would have prevailed. Legend 2: Guard against literalism The modern approach is not only to have regard to extrinsic evidence in the vast majority of cases, but also to be wary of taking written descriptions too literally. A straight line on a small scale plan is not necessarily intended to be a straight line on the ground, and descriptions in the parcels clause can often be imprecise or misleading. The danger of an overly literal interpretation is illustrated by the legend of the ruler Temures. Temures besieged the garrison of Sebastia. To end the siege he promised 5
6 the defenders that no blood would be shed if they surrendered. They surrendered, and (true to his word) he buried them alive. The tendency away from literalism in favour of a more liberal and contextual approach is well illustrated by Norman v Sparling [2014] EWCA Civ The issue in that case was whether the legal boundary ran along the top of a hedge bank, or at the base of it on Mr and Mrs Norman's side. The root conveyance contained some measurements, but there was uncertainty over which datum points had been used to produce them. Attempts by surveyors to plot the boundaries according to these measurements, using the most likely datum points, produced odd results, namely that the boundary ran half way up the hedge bank or bisected a long-established gate. Extraneous evidence, in the form of evidence of subsequent conduct, was therefore relied on to reach the conclusion that the legal boundary ran along the top of the hedge bank, even though this did not accord with any of the measured boundaries plotted by the surveyors. The court felt justified in taking this approach because "taking the boundary to be the top of the bank is within the limits of tolerance permitted by the description itself." The location of fences, hedges or other features will thus often play a decisive role in determining where the legal boundary is. Marc Wilkinson No5 Chambers + 44 (0) mw@no5.com 6
Before : LORD JUSTICE MUMMERY LORD JUSTICE LONGMORE and LORD JUSTICE WILSON Between :
Case No: B2/2009/1996 Neutral Citation Number: [2010] EWCA Civ 873 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE NEWCASTLE UPON TYNE COUNTY COURT THE HON MR JUSTICE DAVID
More informationUnder construction: drafting and interpretation of land options
Under construction: drafting and interpretation of land options Charlie Newington-Bridges, St John s Chambers Published on 27 September 2016 Land Options Introduction 1. In H&S Developments v Chant [2016]
More informationShortfalls on Sale. Toby Watkin
Shortfalls on Sale Toby Watkin 1. In this paper I wish to discuss some issues and considerations which arise when it is expected that there will be a shortfall upon a sale of the mortgaged property following
More informationInside this issue A cold wind blows: the impact of a more literal approach to contractual interpretation on construction contracts
Issue 72 - July 2017 Insight provides practical information on topical issues affecting the building, engineering and energy sectors. Inside this issue A cold wind blows: the impact of a more literal approach
More informationB e f o r e: LORD JUSTICE PETER GIBSON LORD JUSTICE CLARKE SIR MARTIN NOURSE HOLDING & BARNES PLC. Claimant/Appellant.
A3/2000/3076 Neutral Citation Number: [2001] EWCA Civ 1334 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE CHANCERY DIVISION (Mr Justice Neuberger) B e f o
More informationBefore : HIS HONOUR JUDGE DIGHT Between :
UPPER TRIBUNAL TAX AND CHANCERY CHAMBER Case No: UT/2014/0022 Royal Courts of Justice, Rolls Building Fetter Lane, London, EC4A 1NL Date: 31/12/2015 Before : HIS HONOUR JUDGE DIGHT - - - - - - - - - -
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE (Sub-Registry, Tobago) BETWEEN AND REASONS
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE (Sub-Registry, Tobago) Claim No: CV 2009-2373 BETWEEN SEAN EVERT DENOON CLAIMANT AND OLIVER SALANDY DEFENDANT Before the Honourable Mr. Justice
More informationBefore : THE CHANCELLOR OF THE HIGH COURT LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER And MR JUSTICE LEWISON Between : - and -
Neutral Citation Number: [2009] EWCA Civ 1164 Case No: A3/2009/1266 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM CHANCEY DIVISION, CARDIFF DISTRICT REGISTRY HIS HONOUR JUDGE JARMAN QC (sitting
More informationSwings and Roundabouts in the law of Rectification
Swings and Roundabouts in the law of Rectification 1. One consequence of a global financial downturn is that contracts, including property contracts and especially contracts requiring valuation, have to
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE (Sub-Registry, San Fernando) BETWEEN PADMA DASS AND
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE (Sub-Registry, San Fernando) CLAIM NO. CV 2012-03309 BETWEEN PADMA DASS AND Claimant RAMNATH BALLY SHAZMIN BALLY Defendants Before the Honourable
More informationHarry Fitzhugh v Anthony Fitzhugh
Page1 Harry Fitzhugh v Anthony Fitzhugh Case No: A3/2011/3117 Court of Appeal (Civil Division) 1 June 2012 [2012] EWCA Civ 694 2012 WL 1933439 Before: Lord Justice Longmore Lord Justice Rimer and Lord
More informationRegistration Make-Believe and Forgery Swift 1 st v Chief Land Registrar
Registration Make-Believe and Forgery Swift 1 st v Chief Land Registrar As was perhaps inevitable following the High Court decisions in Fitzwilliam v Richall Holdings ([2013] EWHC 86 (Ch); [2013] 1 P.
More informationParty Wall Appeals lessons from the Rolls Building case. John de Waal QC
Party Wall Appeals lessons from the Rolls Building case John de Waal QC Introduction Section 10 of the Party Wall etc. Act 1996 ( the Act ) provides a now well-known and established mechanism for resolving
More information- and - Judgment Judgment date: 3 April 2018 Transcribed from 15:18:09 until 15:55:42. Reporting Restrictions Applied: No
Case No: D70CF001 IN THE CARDIFF CIVIL AND FAMILY JUSTICE CENTRE 2 Park Street Cardiff CF10 1ET BEFORE: HIS HONOUR JUDGE MILWYN JARMAN QC BETWEEN: ZULFKAR AHMED - and - MRS MAUREEN PARSONS APPLICANT RESPONDENT
More informationThe clause (ACAS Form COT-3) provided:
THE CONSTRUCTION OF COMPROMISE AGREEMENTS The leading case is Bank of Credit and Commerce International SAI v Ali [2001] UKHL 8; [2002] 1 AC 251. It was also an extreme case where the majority of the House
More informationALAN ERIC CAMPBELL MAUREEN CAMPBELL - and - WILLIAM T BANKS & ORS
Neutral Citation Number: [2011] EWCA Civ 61 Case No: A3/2009/1419 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CHANCERY DIVISION LIVERPOOL DISTRICT REGISTRY THE HON
More informationTHE IMPACT OF PRE-AND POST-CONTRACTUAL CONDUCT ON CONTRACTUAL INTERPRETATION
THE IMPACT OF PRE-AND POST-CONTRACTUAL CONDUCT ON CONTRACTUAL INTERPRETATION 1. Where there is a dispute as to the meaning of a provision in a contract, the role of the court is to determine the meaning
More informationBefore : LORD JUSTICE ELIAS LORD JUSTICE UNDERHILL and MR JUSTICE PETER JACKSON. Between : ABDUL SALEEM KOORI
Neutral Citation Number: [2016] EWCA Civ 552 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE UPPER TRIBUNAL (IMMIGRATION AND ASYLUM CHAMBER) DEPUTY JUDGES McCARTHY AND ROBERTSON IA/04622/2014
More informationAdjudication in a new landscape
Adjudication in a new landscape Charles Auld, St John s Chambers Published on 13 th March 2014 Introduction 1. Under the Land Registration Act 1925 disputes were referred to the Solicitor to HM Land Registry.
More informationWhy did the MF/1 terms not apply? The judge had concluded that the MF/1 terms did not apply because:
United Kingdom Letters of intent and contract formation RTS Flexible Systems Limited (Respondents) v Molkerei Alois Muller Gmbh & Company KG (UK Production) (Appellants) [2010] UKSC 14C Chris Hill and
More informationThe boundary between construction and rectification, where does it lie and does it matter?
The boundary between construction and rectification, where does it lie and does it matter? Or: The temptation to try and slip favourable terms in during drafting. Guy Adams, St John s Chambers Published
More informationOPINIONS OF THE LORDS OF APPEAL
HOUSE OF LORDS SESSION 2004 05 [2004] UKHL 54 on appeal from: [2003] EWCA Civ 470 OPINIONS OF THE LORDS OF APPEAL FOR JUDGMENT IN THE CAUSE Sirius International Insurance Company (Publ) (Appellants) v.
More informationJUDGMENT. R (on the application of Fitzroy George) (Respondent) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Appellant)
Easter Term [2014] UKSC 28 On appeal from: [2012] EWCA Civ 1362 JUDGMENT R (on the application of Fitzroy George) (Respondent) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Appellant) before Lord Neuberger,
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No. CV2014-02188 BETWEEN DEOLAL GANGADEEN Claimant AND HAROON HOSEIN Defendant Before the Honourable Mr. Justice Robin N. Mohammed
More informationCoventry v Lawrence: a general overview and the significance of planning decisions
Coventry v Lawrence: a general overview and the significance of planning decisions Jonathan Wills This Note is intended to accompany the seminar given at Landmark Chambers on 7 May 2014. Introduction 1.
More informationRectification Wills and Trusts
Rectification Wills and Trusts Amanda Hardy QC Tax Chambers 15 Old Square Lincoln s Inn Recent cases: Rectification of a will Marley v Rawlings and another [2014] UKSC A husband and wife each executed
More informationCHARLIE GRECIA ARTIS GRECIA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE SAINT VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES SUIT NO.: 322 OF 1998 BETWEEN: EDWARD HALL v CHARLIE GRECIA ARTIS GRECIA Claimant Defendants Appearances: Ms. Nicole Sylvester for the Claimant
More informationContractual Construction - Cook v Broad: whether the requirement of consent in a restrictive covenant is carried to a vendor s successor in title
Contractual Construction - Cook v Broad: whether the requirement of consent in a restrictive covenant is carried to a vendor s successor in title Lawrence Power appeared for the Churchill family in Churchill
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL BETWEEN AND
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Civil Appeal No: 243 of 2011 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL BETWEEN XAVIER GOODRIDGE Appellant AND BABY NAGASSAR Respondent PANEL: A. Mendonça, J.A. A. Yorke-Soo Hon, J.A. R. Narine,
More informationInterpretation of contracts - liberalism re-affirmed
Interpretation of contracts - liberalism re-affirmed In Re Sigma Finance Corporation (in administrative receivership) [2009] UKSC 2 Case analysis by Caroline Edwards Interpretation of contracts liberalism
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN NORTHERN IRELAND CROCKAGARRAN WIND FARM LIMITED. -v- ARTHUR McCRORY AND MARY McCRORY
Neutral Citation No: [2012] NICh 30 Ref: DEE8619 Judgment: approved by the Court for handing down Delivered: 11/10/2012 (subject to editorial corrections) DEENY J IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN NORTHERN
More informationBefore : MR JUSTICE LEGGATT Between : LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES. - and
Neutral Citation Number: [2012] EWCA Civ 3292 (QB) Case No: QB/2012/0301 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (QUEEN S BENCH DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE KINGSTON COUNTY COURT HER HONOUR JUDGE JAKENS 2KT00203 Royal
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF BELIZE, A.D CIVIL APPEAL NO. 32 OF 2008
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF BELIZE, A.D. 2010 CIVIL APPEAL NO. 32 OF 2008 BETWEEN: GEORGE WESTBY ERNEST STAINE (Administrator of the Estate of Abner Westby) ELIZABETH MICHAEL ELMA WESTBY (Former Administrators
More informationSection 2 of the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989
Section 2 of the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 Katie Hooper St John s Chambers Friday, 17 th June 2011 Section 2: Contracts for the sale etc of land to be made by signed writing SS
More informationTHE INTERPRETATION OF EXCLUSION CLAUSES
BRIEFING THE INTERPRETATION OF EXCLUSION CLAUSES MAY 2016 LITERAL AND NATURAL MEANING IS OF PRIMARY IMPORTANCE COMMERCIALITY MAY BE CONSIDERED THE COURT MAY ALSO CONSIDER APPLICATION OF THE CONTRA PROFERENTEM
More informationAddress: Wilberforce Chambers, 8, New Square, Lincoln=s Inn, London, WC2A 3QP
Purposive Construction in the Law of Trusts John Child Address: Wilberforce Chambers, 8, New Square, Lincoln=s Inn, London, WC2A 3QP Email: jchild@wilberforce.co.uk [2000] PCB 238 It is now well established
More informationBefore: LORD JUSTICE CARNWATH LADY JUSTICE HALLETT and LORD JUSTICE LAWRENCE COLLINS Between:
Neutral Citation Number: [2007] EWCA Civ 570 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE LANDS TRIBUNAL Case No: C3/2006/2088 Royal Courts of Justice Strand,
More informationParol Testimony by Knud E. Hermansen 1 P.L.S., P.E., Ph.D., Esq.
Parol Testimony by Knud E. Hermansen 1 P.L.S., P.E., Ph.D., Esq. Parol testimony or verbal testimony is an important source of information for retracing boundaries. Few surveyors would ignore a landowner
More informationBefore : - and - THE HIGH COMMISSION OF BRUNEI DARUSSALAM
Neutral Citation Number: [2014] EWCA Civ 1521 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN S BENCH DIVISION The Honourable Mr Justice Bean QB20130421 Case No:
More informationJUDGMENT. BPE Solicitors and another (Respondents) v Gabriel (Appellant)
Trinity Term [2015] UKSC 39 On appeal from: [2013] EWCA Civ 1513 JUDGMENT BPE Solicitors and another (Respondents) v Gabriel (Appellant) before Lord Mance Lord Sumption Lord Carnwath Lord Toulson Lord
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. Between. By way of her Lawful Attorney Kenneth Antoine. And
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Claim No. CV 2013-04883 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Between SYBIL CHIN SLICK By way of her Lawful Attorney Kenneth Antoine Claimant GAIL HICKS And Defendant Before the
More informationTHE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CV BETWEEN AND. Before the Honourable Mr Justice Ronnie Boodoosingh
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CV 2011 00977 BETWEEN ADINA HOYTE CLAIMANT AND DONALD WOHLER DEFENDANT Before the Honourable Mr Justice Ronnie Boodoosingh Appearances:
More informationJUDGMENT. Leymunlall Nandrame and others (Appellants) v Lomas Ramsaran (Respondent) (Mauritius)
Easter Term [2015] UKPC 20 Privy Council Appeal No 0104 of 2012 JUDGMENT Leymunlall Nandrame and others (Appellants) v Lomas Ramsaran (Respondent) (Mauritius) From the Supreme Court of Mauritius before
More informationJudicial Review, Competence and the Rational Basis Theory
Judicial Review, Competence and the Rational Basis Theory by Undergraduate Student Keble College, Oxford This article was published on: 5 February 2005. Citation: Walsh, D, Judicial Review, Competence
More informationLiability for Injuries Caused by Dogs. Jonathan Owen
Liability for Injuries Caused by Dogs Jonathan Owen Introduction 1. This article addressed the liability for injuries caused by dogs, such as when a person is bitten, or knocked over by a dog. Such cases,
More informationEMPLOYMENT RIGHTS: AGENCY WORKERS: James v Greenwich Council and subsequent cases
EMPLOYMENT RIGHTS: AGENCY WORKERS: James v Greenwich Council and subsequent cases Agency workers in the UK face a number of difficulties due to their vulnerable position in the job market. They have no
More informationIn most areas of litigation, it is relatively easy for an experienced solicitor to advise a client at
A Practical Approach to Boundary Disputes In most areas of litigation, it is relatively easy for an experienced solicitor to advise a client at the outset about how a case should be approached. The first
More informationCommon law system foundations for excluding evidence obtained illegally or unfairly and the relevant case law
Katarzyna Piątkowska Common law system foundations for excluding evidence obtained illegally or unfairly and the relevant case law Keywords: improperly, unfairly, illegally obtained evidence, admissibility,
More informationJUDGMENT. Jamaican Redevelopment Foundation Inc (Appellant) v The Real Estate Board (Respondent)
[2014] UKPC 28 Privy Council Appeal No 0066 of 2013 JUDGMENT Jamaican Redevelopment Foundation Inc (Appellant) v The Real Estate Board (Respondent) From the Court of Appeal of Jamaica before Lady Hale
More informationJUDGMENT. Rolle Family and Company Limited (Appellant) v Rolle (Respondent) (Bahamas)
Michaelmas Term [2017] UKPC 35 Privy Council Appeal No 0095 of 2015 JUDGMENT Rolle Family and Company Limited (Appellant) v Rolle (Respondent) (Bahamas) From the Court of Appeal of the Commonwealth of
More informationBefore : THE MASTER OF THE ROLLS LADY JUSTICE ARDEN and LORD JUSTICE JACKSON Between :
Case No: B2/2010/2578 Neutral Citation Number: [2011] EWCA Civ 1306 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM WORCESTER COUNTY COURT HHJ PEARCE-HIGGINS QC Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London,
More informationJudicial Review: proposals for reform
: proposals for reform Response to the Ministry of Justice Consultation January 2013 Child Poverty Action Group 94 White Lion Street London N1 9PF www.cpag.org.uk Introduction 1. The Child Poverty Action
More informationSkanska Rashleigh Weatherfoil Ltd v Somerfield Stores Ltd [2006] ABC.L.R. 11/22
CA on appeal from QBD (Mr Justice Ramsey) before Neuberger LJ; Richards LJ; Leveson LJ. 22 nd November 2006 LORD JUSTICE NEUBERGER: 1. This is an appeal from the decision of Ramsey J on the preliminary
More informationSECTION 272 OF THE PROPERTY LAW ACT 1958 ("PLA") - ITS EFFECT ON TITLE DISCREPANCIES INCLUDING ADVERSE POSSESSION CLAIMS
SECTION 272 OF THE PROPERTY LAW ACT 1958 ("PLA") - ITS EFFECT ON TITLE DISCREPANCIES INCLUDING ADVERSE POSSESSION CLAIMS Prepared by Chantel Harkin & presented by Geoff Manolitsa Macpherson & Kelley Lawyers
More informationGalliford Try Construction Ltd v Mott MacDonald Ltd [2008] APP.L.R. 03/14
JUDGMENT : Mr Justice Coulson : TCC. 14 th March 2008 Introduction 1. This is an application by the Defendant for an order that paragraphs 39 to 48 inclusive of the witness statement of Mr Joseph Martin,
More informationWHEN A CLAIM FALLS OUT OF THE PROTOCOL, WHO WINS?
WHEN A CLAIM FALLS OUT OF THE PROTOCOL, WHO WINS? 1. On 20 April 2016 Deputy District Judge Cooksley sitting at Peterborough County Court granted both parties permission to appeal the assessment of costs
More informationMalik v Fassenfelt [2013] EWCA Civ 798: The Implications for Private Landlords and Landowners
Introduction Malik v Fassenfelt [2013] EWCA Civ 798: The Implications for Private Landlords and Landowners Matthew Brown, Guildhall Chambers 1 1. Historically it was rare for a judgment in the field of
More informationWhite Young Green Consulting v Brooke House Sixth Form College [2007] APP.L.R. 05/22
JUDGMENT : Mr Justice Ramsey : TCC. 22 nd May 2007 Introduction 1. This is an application for leave to appeal under s.69(3) of the Arbitration Act 1996. The arbitration concerns the appointment of the
More informationJUDGMENT. Republic Bank Limited (Appellant) v Lochan and another (Respondents) (Trinidad and Tobago)
Trinity Term [2015] UKPC 26 Privy Council Appeal No 0087 of 2014 JUDGMENT Republic Bank Limited (Appellant) v Lochan and another (Respondents) (Trinidad and Tobago) From the Court of Appeal of the Republic
More informationMR PAULO STANISLAW. and MR JOSHUA HENDERSON. SKELETON ARGUMENT FOR THE CLAIMANT/APPELLANT [excerpt]
IN THE COUNTY COURT AT WATFORD Claim No: 5YJ5538 BETWEEN MR PAULO STANISLAW and Claimant/Appellant MR JOSHUA HENDERSON Defendant/Respondent SKELETON ARGUMENT FOR THE CLAIMANT/APPELLANT [excerpt] Introduction
More informationNO CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT TYLER, TEXAS
NO. 12-10-00250-CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT TYLER, TEXAS LAMAR ELDER, JR., FERRIA JEAN APPEAL FROM THE ELDER, LACETTA R. ELDER, PAMELA ELDER, BARBARA F. COX, NATHAN JONES
More informationBefore: THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE BARLING (President) LORD CARLILE OF BERRIEW QC SHEILA HEWITT. Sitting as a Tribunal in England and Wales BAA LIMITED
Neutral citation [2010] CAT 9 IN THE COMPETITION APPEAL TRIBUNAL Case Number: 1110/6/8/09 Victoria House Bloomsbury Place London WC1A 2EB 25 February 2010 Before: THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE BARLING (President)
More informationJUDGMENT. SANS SOUCI LIMITED (Appellant) v VRL SERVICES LIMITED (Respondent)
[2012] UKPC 6 Privy Council Appeal No 0088 of 2010 JUDGMENT SANS SOUCI LIMITED (Appellant) v VRL SERVICES LIMITED (Respondent) From the Court of Appeal of Jamaica before Lord Hope Lord Clarke Lord Sumption
More informationRecent Developments in the Canadian Law of Contract
Honest Performance and Absolutely Everything Else By Ryan P. Krushelnitzky and Sandra L. Corbett QC Recent Developments in the Canadian Law of Contract Bhasin and Sattva represent important changes and
More informationPart 36, Construction and the Doctrine of Mistake. Andrew Hogan
Part 36, Construction and the Doctrine of Mistake Andrew Hogan For many reasons, the tool of choice to use for the compromise of disputes, either litigated or at the pre-litigation stage, is the part 36
More informationRIGHTS OF WAY AND PUBLIC FOOTPATHS BELIEF, INTENTION AND THE CAPACITY TO DEDICATE Stephen Whale
RIGHTS OF WAY AND PUBLIC FOOTPATHS BELIEF, INTENTION AND THE CAPACITY TO DEDICATE Stephen Whale 1. In this paper I intend briefly to discuss three topics which often arise in rights of way cases particularly
More informationMR PETER WHITE MRS OLGA WHITE. And MR STEPHEN LITTLE MRS MICHELLE LITTLE AUTHORISED JUDGMENT
MR PETER WHITE MRS OLGA WHITE Appellants And MR STEPHEN LITTLE MRS MICHELLE LITTLE Respondents AUTHORISED JUDGMENT - 9.2.17 1. The Appellants appeal against a Party Wall Award, dated 6.10.16, made by the
More informationRIGHTS OF LIGHT and SECTION 237 TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT Neil Cameron QC
RIGHTS OF LIGHT and SECTION 237 TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 Neil Cameron QC 1. Whether or not the judgment in HKRUK II (CHC) Limited v. Heaney [2010] EWHC 2245 (Ch) ( Heaney ) represents any change
More informationThe Contractor s building defects liability in England and Wales
The Contractor s building defects liability in England and Wales We discuss in this paper in what circumstances can a contractor be found liable for defects discovered by the building occupier several
More informationB e f o r e: THE LORD CHIEF JUSTICE OF ENGLAND AND WALES (The Lord Woolf of Barnes) LORD JUSTICE WALLER and LORD JUSTICE LAWS
Neutral Citation Number: [2002] EWCA Civ 879 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION (HIS HONOUR JUDGE BRADBURY)
More informationJUDGMENT. Oceania Heights Limited (Appellant) v Willard Clarke Enterprises Limited & others (Respondent)
[2013] UKPC 3 Privy Council Appeal No 0049 of 2011 JUDGMENT Oceania Heights Limited (Appellant) v Willard Clarke Enterprises Limited & others (Respondent) From the Court of the Commonwealth of the Bahamas
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE (Sub-Registry, Tobago) Between SMITH LEWIS AND
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE (Sub-Registry, Tobago) Claim No. CV 2011-00281 Between SMITH LEWIS AND Claimant ANJAN SOOKDEO Defendant Before the Honourable Mr. Justice
More informationTHE INHERITANCE ACT IN 2016
THE INHERITANCE ACT IN 2016 Tim Walsh, Guildhall Chambers 1. There have been two major developments in the law concerning the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 in the last two
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN AND
TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Cv. No: 2009-02923 BETWEEN EVELYN NOEL CLAIMANT AND DINANATH SHARMA NYLA SHARMA (By her next friend DINANATH SHARMA) 1 st DEFENDANT 2 ND DEFENDANT BEFORE
More informationBefore: LORD JUSTICE BRIGGS and LORD JUSTICE SALES Between:
Neutral Citation Number: [2016] EWCA Civ 1260 Case No: C1/2016/0625 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT (QUEEN S BENCH) THE HON. MR JUSTICE JAY CO33722015 Royal Courts
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
ST VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CIVIL SUIT NO. 198 OF 1998 BETWEEN: AMOS STEWART Plaintiff and Appearances: John Bayliss Frederick for the Plaintiff Olin Dennie for the Defendants
More informationHOUSE OF LORDS OPINIONS OF THE LORDS OF APPEAL FOR JUDGMENT
House of Lords 01 luglio 2009 HOUSE OF LORDS OPINIONS OF THE LORDS OF APPEAL FOR JUDGMENT IN THE CAUSE Chartbrook Limited (Respondents) v Persimmon Homes Limited and others (Appellants) and another (Respondent)
More information*141 South Lakeland District Council Appellants v Secretary of State for the Environment and Another Respondents
Page 1 Status: Positive or Neutral Judicial Treatment *141 South Lakeland District Council Appellants v Secretary of State for the Environment and Another Respondents House of Lords 30 January 1992 [1992]
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN ESAU RALPH BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PETER A. RAJKUMAR. Reasons for decision
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CV No. 2010-00120 BETWEEN MALYN BERNARD CLAIMANT AND NESTER PATRICIA RALPH ESAU RALPH DEFENDANTS BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PETER
More informationMR ANDREW GRAEME WARING. and MR MARK MCDONNELL. Judgment. 1. On 14 June 2016, the claimant and defendant were cycling in opposite directions on Lodge
IN THE COUNTY COURT AT BRIGHTON CLAIM NO: D60YJ743 Brighton County and Family Court William Street Brighton BN2 0RF BEFORE HER HONOUR JUDGE VENN BETWEEN MR ANDREW GRAEME WARING Claimant and MR MARK MCDONNELL
More informationPrivately Funded Civil Litigation CFAs and DBAs Frequently Asked Questions
Privately Funded Civil Litigation CFAs and DBAs Frequently Asked Questions Updated October 2017 The Bar Council frequently receives enquiries from barristers and clerks in relation to Conditional Fee Agreements
More informationAdverse possession and Article 1 of the European Convention Panesar, S. and Wood, J. Author post-print (accepted) deposited in CURVE March 2012
Adverse possession and Article 1 of the European Convention Panesar, S. and Wood, J. Author post-print (accepted) deposited in CURVE March 2012 Original citation & hyperlink: Panesar, S. and Wood, J. (2009)
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN AND. Before: The Hon. Justice Nolan Bereaux. Mr Gaston Benjamin for Plaintiff Mr Carlton George for Defendants
TRINIDAD & TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE HCA. NO.1644/99 BETWEEN ENWARD ANTHONY ISAAC Plaintiff AND ANTHONY DEO GANESS & MARCINA MARCIA GANESS Defendants Before: The Hon. Justice Nolan Bereaux Appearances:
More informationGS (Article 3 health exceptionality) India [2011] UKUT 35 (IAC) THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Before LORD BANNATYNE SENIOR IMMIGRATION JUDGE ALLEN.
Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) GS (Article 3 health exceptionality) India [2011] UKUT 35 (IAC) THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Field House On 16 November 2010 Determination Promulgated Before
More informationGEORGE K. POLYZOS, ET AL. OPINION BY v. Record No JUSTICE LAWRENCE L. KOONTZ, JR. June 7, 2002 FRANK COTRUPI
Present: All the Justices GEORGE K. POLYZOS, ET AL. OPINION BY v. Record No. 011778 JUSTICE LAWRENCE L. KOONTZ, JR. June 7, 2002 FRANK COTRUPI FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT NEWS Robert
More informationTOLATA: Common misconceptions and update Rhys Taylor Barrister and Arbitrator 30 Park Place
TOLATA: Common misconceptions and update Rhys Taylor Barrister and Arbitrator 30 Park Place 10 Common misconceptions Misconception 1 of 10 It s family law and the result needs to be fair (fairness only
More informationUttlesford District Council v Secretary of State for the Environment and another
Page 1 Estates Gazette Planning Law Reports/1991/Volume 2 /Uttlesford District Council v Secretary of State for the Environment and another - [1991] 2 PLR 76 [1991] 2 PLR 76 Uttlesford District Council
More informationENFRANCHISEMENT OF MIXED USE PREMISES
ENFRANCHISEMENT OF MIXED USE PREMISES WHICH MIXED USE BUILDINGS ARE HOUSES Is the Property a house? 1. For the purposes of the 1967 Act a house is defined by s2 as follows, so far as relevant (1) For the
More informationJUDGMENT. R (on the application of AA) (FC) (Appellant) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent)
Trinity Term [2013] UKSC 49 On appeal from: [2012] EWCA Civ 1383 JUDGMENT R (on the application of AA) (FC) (Appellant) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent) before Lord Neuberger,
More informationAlternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) In Chapter 36 of his Final Report Jackson LJ wrote:
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) In Chapter 36 of his Final Report Jackson LJ wrote: 4.2 I recommend that: (i) There should be a serious campaign (a) to ensure that all litigation lawyers and judges
More informationBefore : LORD JUSTICE MUMMERY LORD JUSTICE PATTEN and MR. JUSTICE HEDLEY Between :
Neutral Citation Number: [2011] EWCA Civ 922 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE GUILDFORD COUNTY COURT His Honour Judge Robert Reid Q.C. 8GU02043 Case No: B3/2010/2700 Royal Courts
More informationBefore: LORD JUSTICE MCFARLANE and LORD JUSTICE BEATSON Between :
Neutral Citation Number: [2017] EWCA Civ 275 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM DIVISIONAL COURT LORD JUSTICE BURNETT [2017] EWHC 640 Admin Before: Case No: C1/2017/0912 Royal Courts
More informationOVERVIEW OF CONTRACT LAW
OVERVIEW OF CONTRACT LAW Liability is generally the key issue in regards to contractual disputes. Purpose of K law is to provide the rules which determine when one party is liable to another under or in
More informationINTERPRETATION OF CONTRACTS
INTERPRETATION OF CONTRACTS ISBN 978-98-3519-11-8 Author: Hamid Ibrahim Binding: Softcover/Extent: 532 pp Publication Price: MYR 210.00 The law is stated as of February 1, 2008 PRINCIPLES & CANONS OF CONSTRUCTION
More informationPaper for Chancery Bar Seminar in Isle of Man KNOWLEDGE AND APPROVAL WHAT TO LOOK FOR?
Paper for Chancery Bar Seminar in Isle of Man KNOWLEDGE AND APPROVAL WHAT TO LOOK FOR? Alexander Learmonth New Square Chambers, 12 New Square, Lincoln s Inn For a will to be valid, the formal requirements
More informationWHAT IS A VILLAGE GREEN?
WHAT IS A VILLAGE GREEN? Gwion Lewis 1. At first blush, the notion that applications should be made in 2011 to have land recognised as a town or village green sounds hopelessly quaint. Maypole dancing,
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL IN THE MATTER OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION ACT CHAP 90:03 AND
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE COURT OF APPEAL Claim No. CV 2012-00892 Civil Appeal No: 72 of 2012 IN THE MATTER OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION ACT CHAP 90:03 AND IN THE MATTER OF THE INTERPRETATION OF
More informationAdverse Possession Update
Adverse Possession Update Alex Troup St John s Chambers 8 th June 2010 The old law Unregistered land: the "old law" applies, i.e. 12 years adverse possession gives squatter possessory title Registered
More informationSOCIAL SECURITY ACT 1986
Commissioner s File: CIS/109/1994 SOCIAL SECURITY ACT 1986 SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION ACT 1992 APPEAL FROM DECISION OF SOCIAL SECURITY APPEAL TRIBUNAL ON A QUESTION OF LAW DECISION OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY
More informationBefore: LORD JUSTICE WARD LORD JUSTICE LLOYD and LORD JUSTICE KITCHIN Between: - and -
Case No: B2/2011/0772 Neutral Citation Number: [2011] EWCA Civ 1314 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE CENTRAL LONDON COUNTY COURT HIS HONOUR JUDGE COWELL Royal Courts of Justice
More information