Roy Stephen Farrow v Duncan Boag

Decision date: 20 July 2023

Neutral citation: [2023] UKUT 167 (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 the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) correctly fixed the exact boundary between two neighbouring registered titles based on an application plan and historical conveyancing evidence stemming from a 1913 Indenture. The Upper Tribunal held the FTT had erred: the evidence was insufficient to identify the 1913 boundary with the precision required by the statutory rules and Land Registry guidance, so the application plan could not be verified as the exact boundary. The appeal was allowed and the entries made under the FTT order were directed to be deleted.

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 an application seeks a determination of an exact boundary under the Land Registration regime, the plan submitted must be supported by evidence sufficient to identify the boundary with the precision necessary for recording; if the available documentary and physical evidence (for example, an historic schematic conveyance plan and accompanying reference points) cannot establish that required precision, the tribunal must refuse the application.

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 observed that absence of evidence of physical markers in the historic documents does not justify assuming no temporary markers once existed and that later conveyances or more recent physical features have limited probative value unless they can be shown to relate to features existing when the boundary was fixed.