Charalambous v Welding

Charalambous v Welding

The appeal was dismissed because the trial judge was entitled to find, on the evidence, that there was no agreement—express or implied—between the predecessors in title to alter the boundary from that shown on the Land Registry plan. The evidence did not support the existence of a binding boundary agreement, and the appellate court found no basis to overturn the trial judge's findings of fact.

Parties
Appellant: Charalambous; Respondent: Welding
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 December 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Trial Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Boundary Disputes, Boundary Agreements, Land Registration, Evidentiary Standards in Appeals
Property Law Boundary Disputes Boundary Agreements Land Registration Evidentiary Standards in Appeals

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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Charalambous

Appellant

Welding

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Trial Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was an agreement between predecessors in title fixing a boundary different from that shown on the Land Registry plan
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge's findings of fact regarding the existence of a boundary agreement were perverse or unsupported by evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the trial judge was entitled to find, on the evidence, that there was no agreement—express or implied—between the predecessors in title to alter the boundary from that shown on the Land Registry plan. The evidence did not support the existence of a binding boundary agreement, and the appellate court found no basis to overturn the trial judge's findings of fact.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed