Drury v Rafique & Anor [2018] EWHC 1527 (Ch) (29 June 2018)

Drury v Rafique & Anor [2018] EWHC 1527 (Ch) (29 June 2018)

The trial judge was entitled to accept the respondents' evidence and expert opinion, and to assess damages on the basis presented. The judge gave sufficient reasons for his findings, addressed the credibility of witnesses, and was justified in making the orders regarding the gas flue and indemnity costs. The appeal was dismissed as no error of law or fact was established.

Citation
[2018] EWHC 1527 (Ch)
Parties
Appellant: Stuart Drury; Respondent: Umar Rafique; Respondent: Mariam Rafique
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 June 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Boundary Dispute, Damages Assessment, Injunctions, Cross Undertaking in Damages, Expert Evidence, Costs (part 36)
Property Law Civil Procedure Boundary Dispute Damages Assessment Injunctions Cross Undertaking in Damages Expert Evidence Costs (part 36)

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stuart Drury

Appellant

Umar Rafique

Respondent

Mariam Rafique

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in assessing damages for losses arising from an undertaking in a boundary dispute
  2. 2 Whether the judge gave adequate reasons for his findings
  3. 3 Whether the order to reposition a gas flue and the indemnity costs order were correct

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge was entitled to accept the respondents' evidence and expert opinion, and to assess damages on the basis presented. The judge gave sufficient reasons for his findings, addressed the credibility of witnesses, and was justified in making the orders regarding the gas flue and indemnity costs. The appeal was dismissed as no error of law or fact was established.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Damages of £22,860 to respondents upheld
  • Order requiring appellant to reposition gas flue to 600mm or more from boundary upheld