[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.