Scammell and others v Dicker (Record no. 75199)
[ view plain ]
| 000 -LEADER | |
|---|---|
| fixed length control field | 01839cab a2200193 4500 |
| 001 - CONTROL NUMBER | |
| control field | L129664 |
| 008 - FIXED-LENGTH DATA ELEMENTS--GENERAL INFORMATION | |
| fixed length control field | 050509n2005 000 0 eng u |
| 035 ## - SYSTEM CONTROL NUMBER | |
| System control number | (Sirsi) u129664 |
| 041 ## - LANGUAGE CODE | |
| Language code of text/sound track or separate title | eng |
| 245 ## - TITLE STATEMENT | |
| Title | Scammell and others v Dicker |
| 260 ## - PUBLICATION, DISTRIBUTION, ETC. | |
| Date of publication, distribution, etc. | 2005 |
| 490 ## - SERIES STATEMENT | |
| Series statement | Estates Gazette |
| Volume/sequential designation | [2005] 42 EG 236-242(7) |
| 520 ## - SUMMARY, ETC. | |
| Summary, etc. | [2005] EWCA Civ 205, 14 April 2005. Considers whether a consent order of February 1994, compromising original proceedings concerning a boundary dispute between neighbours, was void for uncertainty. Appeal by the appellant (D) against the earlier decision ((2003) EWHC 1601 (QB)) that the 1994 consent order was void for uncertainty. Proceedings between S and D as to the precise line of the boundary between their properties had commenced in 1989. The 1994 consent order requiring respondents (S) to remove a barn and other appurtenances from D's land was declared to be void for uncertainty in a judgment of 2002, an appeal against which was dismissed in July 2003. The 2002 judgment rejected entirely S's case based on mistake and the 2003 decision dismissed both D's appeal on the uncertainty issue and S's cross-appeal on the question of costs. "Held": appeal allowed. S's claim to set aside the February 1994 consent order for uncertainty must in any event fall on its merits. It would be a complete injustice to conclude that the parties had completely failed on the grounds of uncertainty to settle their litigation at all just because of the difficulty of precisely defining the boundary line at one point on the boundary. |
| 590 ## - LOCAL NOTE (RLIN) | |
| Local note | IKA190505 |
| 650 ## - SUBJECT ADDED ENTRY--TOPICAL TERM | |
| Topical term or geographic name entry element | SCAMMELL V DICKER |
| 690 ## - LOCAL SUBJECT ADDED ENTRY--TOPICAL TERM (OCLC, RLIN) | |
| Topical term or geographic name as entry element | PROPERTY-PROPERTY MANAGEMENT-BOUNDARY DETERMINATION-BOUNDARIES |
| 856 ## - ELECTRONIC LOCATION AND ACCESS | |
| Uniform Resource Identifier | <a href="https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2005/405.html ">https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2005/405.html </a> |
| Public note | View the 2005 decision free of charge at www.bailii.org... |
| 942 ## - ADDED ENTRY ELEMENTS (KOHA) | |
| Suppress in OPAC | 0 |
| Withdrawn status | Lost status | Source of classification or shelving scheme | Damaged status | Not for loan | Home library | Current library | Shelving location | Date acquired | Total Checkouts | Full call number | Barcode | Date last seen | Copy number | Price effective from | Koha item type |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dewey Decimal Classification | London | London | Journal article | 09/05/2005 | L129664 | 129664-1001 | 06/08/2019 | 1 | 06/08/2019 | Law report |