LEAFREALM LAND LTD AGAINST THE CITY OF EDINBURGH COUNCIL AND THE RAEBURN PLACE FOUNDATION AND RAEBURN PLACE DEVELOPMENT LTD [2020] ScotCS CSOH_34 (18 March 2020)

LEAFREALM LAND LTD AGAINST THE CITY OF EDINBURGH COUNCIL AND THE RAEBURN PLACE FOUNDATION AND RAEBURN PLACE DEVELOPMENT LTD [2020] ScotCS CSOH_34 (18 March 2020)

The court found, based on the 1912 Plan and Minute of Agreement, that the 1912 Wall was included within the 1912 Strip and that the south boundary of the strip was the north face of the old estate wall. The plan was preferred over ambiguous wording in the Minute of Agreement. The Corporation acquired title to the strip and wall, and the Council succeeded to that title. The pursuer did not establish ownership of the disputed strip, and the action failed.

Citation
[2020] ScotCS CSOH_34
Parties
Pursuer: Leafrealm Land Limited; First Defender: The City of Edinburgh Council; Second Defender: The Raeburn Place Foundation; Third Defender: Raeburn Place Development Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
18 March 2020
Procedural Posture
Commercial Action / Judgment After Proof
Outcome
Action dismissed
Legal Topics
Land Ownership, Roads Authority, Public Right of Way, Title Registration, Prescription, Jurisdiction, Technical Deficiencies in Conveyancing
Property Law Public Law Civil Procedure Land Ownership Roads Authority Public Right of Way Title Registration Prescription +2 more

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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Leafrealm Land Limited

Pursuer

The City of Edinburgh Council

First Defender

The Raeburn Place Foundation

Second Defender

Raeburn Place Development Limited

Third Defender

Procedural Posture

Commercial Action / Judgment After Proof

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pursuer owns the disputed strip of land
  2. 2 Whether the 1912 Minute of Agreement conveyed title to the strip or wall to the Corporation
  3. 3 Whether the 1912 Wall was built within the 1912 Strip

Ratio Decidendi

The court found, based on the 1912 Plan and Minute of Agreement, that the 1912 Wall was included within the 1912 Strip and that the south boundary of the strip was the north face of the old estate wall. The plan was preferred over ambiguous wording in the Minute of Agreement. The Corporation acquired title to the strip and wall, and the Council succeeded to that title. The pursuer did not establish ownership of the disputed strip, and the action failed.

Court Disposition

Action dismissed

Orders

  • No declarator of ownership granted
  • No interdict granted