Rashid & Anor v Sharif & Anor [2014] EWCA Civ 377 (31 March 2014)

The historic brick wall was a party fence wall, not solely on the claimants' land. Defendants' works to the party wall without notice or consent constituted a technical trespass, but not to the extent found by the trial judge. Injunction was inappropriate; damages in lieu were awarded.

Citation: [2014] EWCA Civ 377
Parties: Claimant/respondent: Mr Abdul Rashid; Claimant/respondent: Mrs Parveen Akhtar; Defendant/appellant: Mr Nadeem Ahmen Sharif; Defendant/appellant: Mrs Gulzar Sharif
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 31 March 2014
Procedural Posture: Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome: Appeal allowed in part; injunction set aside; damages awarded for trespass; each party to bear own costs.
Legal Topics: Boundary Disputes, Trespass, Party Wall, Adverse Possession, Injunctions, Damages

Property Law Civil Procedure Boundary Disputes Trespass Party Wall Adverse Possession Injunctions Damages

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

Mr Abdul Rashid

Claimant/respondent

Mrs Parveen Akhtar

Claimant/respondent

Mr Nadeem Ahmen Sharif

Defendant/appellant

Mrs Gulzar Sharif

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

1 Whether the defendants committed trespass by constructing a shed at the boundary
2 Whether the defendants should be ordered to demolish the north wall of their shed
3 Ownership and legal status of the historic brick wall (boundary/party wall)

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; injunction set aside; damages awarded for trespass; each party to bear own costs.

Orders

Defendants' counterclaim dismissed
Mandatory injunction set aside