Andrew Riddell Dunlop v Rostislav Rostislavavitch Romanoff

Decision date: 29 August 2023

Neutral citation: [2023] UKUT 200 (LC)

Overall AI summary confidence: high

AI Notice: Any short overview, ratio decidendi summary or obiter dicta summary shown on this page is AI-generated, provided only to help users assess potential relevance more quickly, and may be wholly inaccurate. No liability is accepted for the accuracy of any such summary, regardless of any AI confidence rating shown. Users should check the underlying decision and obtain appropriate legal advice rather than relying on any summary.

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 a 1918 conveyance of Lunsford Farm included an adjoining lane (the application land) despite the conveyance plan excluding it. The First-tier Tribunal had preferred the plan, but the Upper Tribunal held that, read with contemporaneous extrinsic evidence, the conveyance did include the lane and alternatively that a corrective interpretation was available to treat the plan exclusion as a mistake. The Upper Tribunal directed registration of the application land to Mr Dunlop.

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: high

Where a conveyance contains a clear inconsistency between precise verbal or schedule descriptions and a plan described as "more particularly delineated", the document must be construed as a whole and relevant contemporaneous extrinsic evidence may be admitted to resolve the inconsistency; a plan will not automatically prevail where the verbal description is clear and compelling extrinsic evidence shows the plan contains a mistake, and corrective interpretation may be justified.

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 tribunal noted that authorities from easement and lease contexts (e.g. Wesleyvale, Network Rail) can inform principles of conveyance construction beyond their immediate factual contexts, and observed that schedules within a conveyance are not merely documents incorporated by reference but may carry equal weight in construction.