Key Facts
- •Dispute over the boundary between Ty Chwarel (owned by Claimants) and Castleton Residential Park (owned by Defendants).
- •The precise location of the southern section of the boundary is in question.
- •Defendants removed trees, allegedly encroaching on Claimants' land.
- •The original conveyance defining the boundary is lost.
- •Expert surveyor opinions initially differed but ultimately converged on the Red Line as the boundary.
- •Historical evidence, primarily aerial photographs and Ordnance Survey maps, were used to determine the boundary.
- •Witness testimonies regarding the existence and extent of a boundary mound were inconsistent.
Legal Principles
The starting point for determining a boundary is the conveyance creating the separate parcels. If lost, other evidence (topographical features) is considered.
Case law, implicit in the judge's reasoning.
Land Registry title plans and Ordnance Survey maps are subject to the General Boundaries Rule (only general position, not exact position, of a boundary is identified).
Case Law - General Boundaries Rule (mentioned and agreed upon by parties)
Expert evidence is admissible if it involves scientific, technical, or other specialised knowledge outside the judge's expertise. The judge isn't bound to accept expert conclusions and must independently analyze the evidence.
TUI UK Limited v Griffiths [2023] UKSC 48; [2023] 3 WLR 1204
Outcomes
The court found in favour of the Defendants.
Based on analysis of aerial photographs, showing a consistent western edge of a tree line over time, indicating the boundary follows the Red Line.