Steven Michael Booler v Sarfraz Yousaf
Decision date: 10 October 2025
Neutral citation: [2025] UKUT 340 (LC)
Overall AI summary confidence: high
Short overview
This short overview is intended to summarise the case, issues and outcome so far as they are supported by the judgment.
AI confidence in this short overview: high
This appeal concerned whether two leases from J C Decaux (2011 and 2018) included a small triangular parcel whose occupation by Mr Booler formed the basis of his claim to be registered for adverse possession. The Upper Tribunal found the 2011 and 2018 leases did not include the parcel, preferring the 2011 lease plan, a photograph and FTT findings over a later unsigned email and a copy Land Registry plan. The appeal was allowed, the Land Registry was directed to give effect to Mr Booler's adverse possession application, and costs were awarded to him.
Ratio decidendi
This summary is intended to identify the ratio decidendi, meaning the legal reasons for deciding and the binding part of the decision.
AI confidence in this ratio decidendi summary: medium
Where earlier lease documentation (including a plan) and contemporaneous evidence of occupation exclude a parcel, a later lease of the same parties will not be taken to have included that parcel absent clear, formal evidence to the contrary; furthermore, contemporaneous documentary and factual evidence accepted by a tribunal can outweigh later unsigned or informal electronic communications of uncertain provenance.
Obiter dicta
This summary is intended to identify obiter dicta, meaning observations made by the way that were not necessary to deciding the case and are not binding.
AI confidence in this obiter dicta summary: medium
The judgment observed that the provenance and informality of electronic communications (for example lacking a statement of truth and produced on a hearsay basis) may limit their evidential weight, and that auction legal packs describing plans as "for identification only" do not necessarily determine the scope of prior leases.