[2007] EWCA Civ 305, 16 March 2007. The appellant property owner (V) appealed against boundary dispute decisions against the respondents (B) and (C). Before purchasing the freehold of his property, V had erected a lean-to. B complained it encroached upon her property. In the border dispute V claimed B had trespassed upon his property while B counterclaimed that V had damaged hers by encroachment. V's other neighbour C claimed that a fence built by V had encroached upon his land. V's contention that the boundaries could be established from original plans was rejected by the expert witness. It was held that V's fence was on C's land and that V's lean-to encroached upon B's land. V was instructed to remove the encroaching parts. "Held": It was improper that C had held discussions with the expert witness in the absence of V. However the decision regarding the fence was reached without the benefit of this evidence and was allowed to stand. V had not been property owner during the construction of his lean-to and so had acted for his landlord, not himself. Therefore although the decision regarding boundary was correct, the order to remove parts of the lean-to was quashed. Judgment accordingly.