Brown & Anor v Pretot & Anor

Brown & Anor v Pretot & Anor

The actual position of the garage and fence at the date of the transfer, together with the parcels clause and the Third Schedule, determine the western boundary. The plan annexed to the transfer, being for identification only, does not override the physical features on the ground. The respondents' claim fails as the boundary is as marked by the garage and fence.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: David James Brown; Claimant/respondent: Valerie Kay Brown; Defendant/appellant: Daniel Rene Pretot; Defendant/appellant: Melanie Pretot
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 November 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Trial Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; respondents' claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Boundary Disputes, Conveyancing, Interpretation of Plans, Physical Features and Boundaries
Property Law Boundary Disputes Conveyancing Interpretation of Plans Physical Features and Boundaries

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David James Brown

Claimant/respondent

Valerie Kay Brown

Claimant/respondent

Daniel Rene Pretot

Defendant/appellant

Melanie Pretot

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Trial Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the correct western boundary between 33 and 31 Moorhouse Way?
  2. 2 Does the plan annexed to the transfer or the physical features on the ground at the date of conveyance determine the boundary?

Ratio Decidendi

The actual position of the garage and fence at the date of the transfer, together with the parcels clause and the Third Schedule, determine the western boundary. The plan annexed to the transfer, being for identification only, does not override the physical features on the ground. The respondents' claim fails as the boundary is as marked by the garage and fence.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; respondents' claim dismissed

Orders

  • Respondents' claim against the appellants is dismissed