Clapham v Narga
Language: English Publication details: [2024] EWCA Civ 1388 Court of Appeal, 11 November 2024Subject(s): Online resources: Summary: Appeal against decision of ChD allowed. A dispute about a strip of land where the owners on one side side had acquired it by adverse possession before first registration of the property on the other side. Exploration of Land Registration Act 1925 s.75; Land Registration Rules 1925 r.278 and the Land Registration Act 2002 s.60. The judgment stated that the purpose of the filed plan is to identify the property not to identify where its boundaries are. The whole point of the general boundaries rule, formerly found in rule 278 of the 1925 Rules and now found in s. 60 LRA 2002, is that the filed plan does not determine the exact line of the boundary. It was also argued that the defendant could have consulted the neighbouring landowners before, rather than after, purchasing Brook Barn. Had she done so, this boundary dispute may not have arisen.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Status | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | Virtual Online | ONLINE JUDGMENT (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | Available |
Appeal against decision of ChD allowed. A dispute about a strip of land where the owners on one side side had acquired it by adverse possession before first registration of the property on the other side. Exploration of Land Registration Act 1925 s.75; Land Registration Rules 1925 r.278 and the Land Registration Act 2002 s.60. The judgment stated that the purpose of the filed plan is to identify the property not to identify where its boundaries are. The whole point of the general boundaries rule, formerly found in rule 278 of the 1925 Rules and now found in s. 60 LRA 2002, is that the filed plan does not determine the exact line of the boundary. It was also argued that the defendant could have consulted the neighbouring landowners before, rather than after, purchasing Brook Barn. Had she done so, this boundary dispute may not have arisen.