RECLAIMING MOTION BY LEAFREALM LAND LTD AGAINST CITY OF EDINBURGH COUNCIL AND OTHERS [2021] ScotCS CSIH_24 (30 April 2021)

RECLAIMING MOTION BY LEAFREALM LAND LTD AGAINST CITY OF EDINBURGH COUNCIL AND OTHERS [2021] ScotCS CSIH_24 (30 April 2021)

The 1912 deed, interpreted with reference to its plan and terms, operated as a conveyance of the six foot strip to the council; the 1912 wall was built wholly within the strip, forming the boundary; there was no gap or ransom strip; the reclaimer's case fails as the factual premise is not established; the 2018 disposition is unregistered and does not confer ownership.

Citation
[2021] ScotCS CSIH_24
Parties
Reclaimer: Leafrealm Land Limited; First Respondent: The City of Edinburgh Council; Second Respondent: Raeburn Place Foundation; Third Respondent: Raeburn Place Development Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
30 April 2021
Procedural Posture
Reclaiming Motion (appeal) / Final Appellate Judgment
Outcome
reclaiming motion refused; interlocutor of Lord Ordinary adhered to
Legal Topics
Interpretation of Deeds, Conveyance, Public Right of Access, Road Vesting, Prescription, Registration of Title
Property Law Public Law Conveyancing Interpretation of Deeds Conveyance Public Right of Access Road Vesting Prescription +1 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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Leafrealm Land Limited

Reclaimer

The City of Edinburgh Council

First Respondent

Raeburn Place Foundation

Second Respondent

Raeburn Place Development Limited

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Reclaiming Motion (appeal) / Final Appellate Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 1912 deed operated as a conveyance of the six foot strip
  2. 2 Ownership and location of the solum of the 1912 wall
  3. 3 Existence of a public right of access over the strip

Ratio Decidendi

The 1912 deed, interpreted with reference to its plan and terms, operated as a conveyance of the six foot strip to the council; the 1912 wall was built wholly within the strip, forming the boundary; there was no gap or ransom strip; the reclaimer's case fails as the factual premise is not established; the 2018 disposition is unregistered and does not confer ownership.

Court Disposition

reclaiming motion refused; interlocutor of Lord Ordinary adhered to

Orders

  • Reclaiming motion refused
  • Interlocutor of Lord Ordinary adhered to