Horn & Anor v Phillips & Anor

Horn & Anor v Phillips & Anor

The transfer of 1st September 1998 was not ambiguous; the boundary was defined by a 61 metre line, and extrinsic evidence should not have been admitted. The Recorder was wrong to find ambiguity and to admit further evidence. The appeal is allowed.

Parties
Claimants/respondents: Mr and Mrs Horn; Defendants/appellants: Mr and Mrs Phillips
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 December 2003
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Brighton County Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Boundary Disputes, Interpretation of Conveyances, Admissibility of Extrinsic Evidence, Costs Orders
Property Law Boundary Disputes Interpretation of Conveyances Admissibility of Extrinsic Evidence Costs Orders

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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr and Mrs Horn

Claimants/respondents

Mr and Mrs Phillips

Defendants/appellants

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Brighton County Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the boundary between the parties' properties is a straight line as determined by the Recorder
  2. 2 Whether the transfer of 1st September 1998 is ambiguous so as to admit extrinsic evidence
  3. 3 Appropriate order as to costs given the offers made and outcome

Ratio Decidendi

The transfer of 1st September 1998 was not ambiguous; the boundary was defined by a 61 metre line, and extrinsic evidence should not have been admitted. The Recorder was wrong to find ambiguity and to admit further evidence. The appeal is allowed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Application to adduce new evidence allowed
  • Appeal allowed