How do I resolve my boundary dispute in a cost-effective way? Useful reminders from the Court of Appeal

Boundary disputes can be extremely costly and time-consuming to resolve – especially where adverse possession (“squatters’ rights”) plays a role.

This is illustrated by the recent Court of Appeal case of Clapham v Narga. Judgment was handed down in November 2024.

The land in dispute was relatively small (approximately between two metres and five metres in depth). The combined legal costs of the dispute exceeded £300,000. No costs order has yet been made, but the general rule is that the unsuccessful party is ordered to pay the costs of the successful party.

How did the dispute start?

Mr and Mrs Clapham and Mr and Mrs Wright (the Appellants) lived in neighbouring properties in Leicestershire. They had lived there for decades.

Their properties included gardens to the north, at the end of which was a brook. Running along the top of the north bank of that brook was a fence. A property known as Brook Barn was located to the north of the fence.

Brook Barn was first registered in March 2003.

On 12 May 2020, during the first Covid lockdown, Ms Narga (the Respondent) purchased Brook Barn.

Prior to purchase, Ms Narga had visited Brook Barn many times. She had noticed that the fence was dilapidated, and that the north bank was overgrown. She also looked at the Land Registry title plan for Brook Barn, which included land on both sides of the brook and the brook itself.

After Ms Narga purchased Broon Barn, a dispute about the extent of the property immediately arose between Ms Narga on one side, and the Claphams and Wrights on the other. On 11 June 2020, Ms Narga wrote to the Wrights asking them to confirm their understanding of the boundary. They replied that the fence was the boundary. Ms Narga did not accept this, and she set about doing works on the disputed land. On 9 November 2020, the Claphams and Wrights issued a legal claim at court. They sought a declaration that they were entitled to be registered as the owners of the disputed land.

What happened when the dispute went to court?

Ms Narga was successful in the County Court and in the High Court. The relevant judges decided that although the Claphams and the Wrights had acquired title to the brook and the north bank by adverse possession for more than 12 years, their title did not have priority over Ms Narga’s registered title because their title was not reasonably apparent on a visual inspection.

The Court of Appeal overturned the decisions of the lower courts, stressing the significance of the general boundaries rule. The general boundaries rule means that in most cases the boundaries shown on the filed plan are indicative only. The exact line of the boundary will be left undetermined – as, for example, whether it includes a hedge or wall and ditch, or runs along the centre of a wall or fence, or its inner or outer face, or how far it runs within or beyond it; or whether the land registered includes the whole or any portion of an adjoining road or stream.

Under the general boundaries rule, Ms Narga was not the owner of the disputed land. The Claphams and the Wrights had become the owners of the disputed land via adverse possession prior to 2020. So, when Brook Barn was conveyed to Ms Narga in 2020, it did not include the disputed land.

What exactly is adverse possession (“squatters rights”)?

By taking and maintaining possession of land without the permission of the original owner, ownership of the land can be acquired. This legal principle is known as adverse possession.

To take a typical example: a person (the “squatter”) might erect a fence one metre to the north of their garden. Then, the person might treat all the land to the south of the fence (i.e. including the additional metre of land) as their garden. Subject to meeting certain criteria, over time the person may obtain ownership of that additional metre of land.

The exact criteria depend on when and whether the land was registered, and when the possession of the land took place.

For example: if the land in question is registered land, and if the squatter was not in possession for at least 12 years prior to 13 October 2003, the new rules introduced under the Land Registration Act 2002 apply. The squatter only needs to be in possession for 10 years, however the squatter may need to satisfy one of the following three conditions:

• It would be unconscionable (unfair) to dispossess the squatter.
  
  
• The squatter genuinely and reasonably believed the land was theirs.
  
  
• The squatter is entitled to be the proprietor for some other reason.

By contrast, in Clapham v Narga, the squatters (i.e. the Claphams and the Wrights) had been in possession for 12 years prior to first registration of the land in March 2003. The Court of Appeal held that the squatters had obtained the land via adverse possession prior to first registration. The squatters did not have to satisfy any of the three conditions listed above.

Useful lessons from Clapham v Narga

• Your title plan is probably not an accurate depiction of your boundary line. Unless the exact line of your boundary has been determined pursuant to what is now rule 118 of the Land Registration Rules 2003 (which will rarely be the case), your title plan is deemed to indicate the general boundaries only.
  
  
• If you have obtained ownership of land via adverse possession, it may be worth getting it registered in your name. Otherwise, you could be storing up problems for the future, especially if the land appears to fall within someone else’s registered title plan.  
  
  
• Before purchasing a property, it may be worth speaking with your future neighbours about boundary matters. If Ms Narga had consulted the neighbouring landowners before purchasing Brook Barn, the boundary dispute may not have arisen.
  
  
• Exercise caution before taking any action that could trigger a boundary dispute. Your neighbours could issue a court claim against you. The costs of a boundary dispute can quickly become disproportionate to the value of the land in dispute.     
  
  

The Birketts view

Our Property Disputes team has extensive expertise in boundary issues and resolving boundary disputes.

If you are in the middle of a boundary dispute, or if you anticipate a boundary dispute, we recommend that you obtain legal advice at the earliest opportunity. We can advise you on the location of your legal boundary, and we can guide you on the most appropriate course of action in your circumstances. Your options may include:

• Applying to the Land Registry for a determined (fixed) boundary, so that the general boundaries rule no longer applies.
  
  
• Applying to the Land Registry for registration of land based on adverse possession, or objecting to someone else’s application to register land based on adverse possession.
  
  
• Applying to court for a declaration of the position of your boundary.
  
  
• Writing to your neighbour to set out your understanding of where the boundary is, or responding to such a letter received from your neighbour.
  
  
• Negotiating a boundary agreement with your neighbour.
  
  

Contact Birketts today to discuss your situation. We would be happy to assist you.