|
If works are being done under Party Wall Act 1996 then, before the work is started, the adjoining owner can require the building owner to provide security for the work. Security must then be given by the building owner within one month of the notice being served, or of a determination by surveyors (s12(2)).
|
|
Do you remember what the presumption of ad medium filum means? The answer is that when land abuts a highway (or private right of way), the boundary of that land is presumed to extend to the middle of that right of way (or highway).
|
|
Where two properties are separated by an artificial ditch alongside a bank (with or without hedge or fence on it) there is a presumption that the boundary is along the edge of the ditch furthest from the bank. But ‘the presumption only comes into operation in cases where the boundary is not delimited in the parcels to the conveyance’, because it is assumed that the landowner digs his drainage ditch on the extreme edge of his property and throws up the earth on the other side of the ditch to avoid committing trespass against its neighbour.
|
|
A reminder of the main time limits, and notices, that have to be served under the Party Wall Act 1996:
|
|
A reminder of the main time limits, and notices, that have to be served under the Party Wall Act 1996:
|
|
The Supreme Court has held that it is not possible to make a possession order in respect of land that is not yet occupied by trespassers. The case involved travellers who had camped in a Forestry Commission wood; the Secretary of State then applied for a possession order and injunction in respect of that wood, but also 13 other woods to which it was thought the travellers might move. A possession order was refused, although the court did make it clear that this did not mean that ‘when trespassers are encamped in part of a wood, an order for possession cannot be made against them in respect of the whole wood’. But, what is less clear is where the crossover point lies. For instance could it be asking too much to try to get possession of a 3000-acre estate when travellers have set up a camp on a field in the middle of it? According to Lord Neuberger, that may well be the case, and claimants should not be over-ambitious when defining land in a possession claim.
|
|
Normally, summary proceedings for trespass or squatting are brought in
the County Court. But, it is often not appreciated that it may be possible to
proceed in the High Court. The Part 55 PD says:
|
|
A reminder of the rules on boundaries that abut tidal waters (whether the
sea or rivers):
|
There are two basic rules about boundaries on highways:
|
|
We all know that boundary disputes can be particularly fraught. The value
of the land will usually be minimal compared to the emotions stirred.
From a practical point of view, practitioners need to remember their duty
to clearly advise the clients on the cost/benefit equation (ie the costs
may not justify the expense and aggravation).
|
|
Hedgerow Regs 1997 make a distinction between ‘protected hedgerows’
and ‘important hedgerows’.
|
|
In registered land, the boundaries on the filed plan are not necessarily
conclusive. This is because most filed plans are deemed to indicate the
‘general boundaries’ (s60 LRA 2002). Under the general boundaries
rule, in the absence of any rebutting information, various presumptions
are used to determine the extent of ownership:
|
|
Be wary of using an OS map to define a boundary. As the CA has recently
made clear, OS plans offer ‘an uncertain guide as to the precise
boundary line’.
|
|
The LR has power to alter the register to correct a boundary error, but
this can be refused if there are ‘exceptional circumstances’ that justify
not altering the boundary. A recent case illustrates how this can work. A
home owner had built a garage on a strip of land that was shown on his
filed plan as being included in his registered title.
|
|
|
