000			01573cab a2200193 4500
001			L136515
008			070205n2007 000 0 eng u
035			_a(Sirsi) u136515
041	0		_aeng
245	0	0	_aHaycocks and another v. Neville and another
260			_c2007
490	0	0	_aEstates Gazette _v(0704) 27 January 2007
520			_a[2007] 04 EG 186 (CS), 18 January 2007. The appellants and the respondents were the registered owners of adjoining properties on a housing development. The respondents had purchased their property from the developer following completion of the development in 1992, while the appellants had purchased their house from the original owner. A dispute arose over the boundary between the properties, centering on the precise location of a "piovot point" where the line of the boundary turned at an angle. "Held": As the plans on the registered title were of little use, being imprecise as to the boundaries and on too small a scale to be helpful, the judge in the original case had also taken additional evidence into account including what the parties had done and features placed on the ground. Despite the fact that the original judge had not taken into account the method for boundary determination of either the appellants or the respondents, it was found that this was an acceptable way to make the necessary decision. The appeal was dismissed.
590			_aKA
650	2	4	_aHAYCOCKS AND ANOTHER V NEVILLE AND ANOTHER
651		4	_aEngland _y886-
690			_aPROPERTY-PROPERTY MANAGEMENT-BOUNDARY DETERMINATION
942			_n0
999			_c78325 _d78325