Grant v Baulkham Hills Shire Council [2000] NSWSC 28

Grant v Baulkham Hills Shire Council [2000] NSWSC 28

There is no evidence that the mean high water mark, the surveyed boundary of the public road, has altered since 1898 as a result of land being reclaimed from or filled into the river. As such, the Council retains ownership of land up to the present mean high water mark, which includes the area occupied by the plaintiff. The Council's claim for possession succeeds.

Parties
Plaintiff/cross Defendant: Nerez Gwynneth Grant; Defendant/cross Claimant: Baulkham Hills Shire Council
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 May 2008
Procedural Posture
Real Property Claim and Cross Claim for Possession / Final Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
Plaintiff's summons dismissed; order for possession in favour of Council on cross-claim; two months granted to vacate; costs to Council.
Legal Topics
Claim of Ownership Against Person in Possession, Boundary of Public Road and River, Title and Possession Disputes
Real Property Claim of Ownership Against Person in Possession Boundary of Public Road and River Title and Possession Disputes

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nerez Gwynneth Grant

Plaintiff/cross Defendant

Baulkham Hills Shire Council

Defendant/cross Claimant

Procedural Posture

Real Property Claim and Cross Claim for Possession / Final Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the land on which the plaintiff's building stands is part of a public road vested in the Council or reclaimed land from the river without authority
  2. 2 Whether there has been a change in the river boundary since the original road survey

Ratio Decidendi

There is no evidence that the mean high water mark, the surveyed boundary of the public road, has altered since 1898 as a result of land being reclaimed from or filled into the river. As such, the Council retains ownership of land up to the present mean high water mark, which includes the area occupied by the plaintiff. The Council's claim for possession succeeds.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's summons dismissed; order for possession in favour of Council on cross-claim; two months granted to vacate; costs to Council.

Orders

  • Plaintiff's summons is dismissed.
  • Order for possession in favour of Baulkham Hills Shire Council.