Childs & Anor v Vernon [2007] EWCA Civ 305 (16 March 2007)

Childs & Anor v Vernon [2007] EWCA Civ 305 (16 March 2007)

The trial judge's findings on the boundary between numbers 19 and 21 were based on reliable factual evidence and not affected by any procedural irregularity. However, the judge erred in holding that any agreement between Mr Vernon and the previous owner of number 17 was legally irrelevant; such an agreement could have legal effect. The order for removal of the lean-to was therefore set aside, but the boundary declarations and other orders were upheld.

Citation
[2007] EWCA Civ 305
Parties
Respondents: CHILDS & ANR; Appellant: VERNON
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 March 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed as to Childs; appeal allowed as to Butcher in part; orders varied.
Legal Topics
Boundary Disputes, Trespass, Evidentiary Procedure, Expert Evidence, Injunctions
Property Law Civil Procedure Boundary Disputes Trespass Evidentiary Procedure Expert Evidence Injunctions

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CHILDS & ANR

Respondents

VERNON

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial was unfair due to procedural irregularity involving the joint expert
  2. 2 Whether the boundary lines between the properties were correctly determined
  3. 3 Whether the encroaching lean-to should be removed

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge's findings on the boundary between numbers 19 and 21 were based on reliable factual evidence and not affected by any procedural irregularity. However, the judge erred in holding that any agreement between Mr Vernon and the previous owner of number 17 was legally irrelevant; such an agreement could have legal effect. The order for removal of the lean-to was therefore set aside, but the boundary declarations and other orders were upheld.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed as to Childs; appeal allowed as to Butcher in part; orders varied.

Orders

  • Order for removal of ornamental fence at front to stand.
  • Order for removal of encroaching part of lean-to quashed.