Upper Tribunal
Lowe and another v William Davis Ltd
[2018] UKUT 206 (TCC)
2018 May 8, 9; June 26
Morgan J
Land registrationRegistrationBoundariesApplication for determination of exact boundary lineFirst-tier Tribunal holding application plan inaccurate and directing registrar to cancel applicationTribunal making finding as to location of boundaryWhether tribunal having jurisdiction to make finding Land Registration Act 2002 (c 9), s 60(3)

The proprietor of a registered estate applied pursuant to section 60(3) of the Land Registration Act 2002 and rule 118 of the Land Registration Rules 2003 for the determination of the exact line of the boundary between its land and adjoining land. The First-tier Tribunal directed the Chief Land Registrar to cancel the application, holding that the plan accompanying the application did not accurately identify the exact line of boundary claimed. The First-tier Tribunal also made a finding as to the location of the boundary. The owners of the adjoining land appealed that finding on the ground, inter alia, that the tribunal had not had jurisdiction to make a finding on the location of the boundary given the findings it had made as to the cancellation of the application.

On the appeal—

Held, appeal dismissed. When the tribunal held that the application plan was inaccurate it was for the tribunal to decide as a matter of case management what course to take. It was open to the tribunal to decide all of the matters in dispute before it or to decide only the issue as to the accuracy of the application plan if that could be determined separately and might dispose of the entire application. Although the right order to make on an application for the determination of an exact line of a boundary would normally be either a direction to give effect to the application or to cancel the application, that did not limit the jurisdiction of the tribunal to make findings and decisions. Accordingly the tribunal had had jurisdiction to make the decision it made (paras 44, 45, 55, 78).

Murdoch v Amesbury [2016] UKUT 3 not followed.

Bean v Katz [2016] UKUT 168 considered.

John Small (instructed by Josiah Hincks Solicitors llp, Leicester) for the adjoining owner.

Stephanie Tozer (instructed by Moss Solicitors llp, Loughborough) for the registered proprietor.

Sarah Parker, Barrister

We use cookies on this website, you can read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. To use website as intended please Accept Cookies