When applying for a boundary determination, it is crucial to gather as much evidence as you can in support of your application. Recently, a couple’s application for a determination of part of the boundary between their home and neighbouring land was rejected by the First-tier Tribunal (FTT).

The couple’s land comprised a house and outbuildings with a field and woodland behind. Their land and the neighbouring land, situated to the south, had been in common ownership until January 2005, when a farmer had purchased the neighbouring land. The couple had bought their home in 2020. A dispute arose between the couple and the farmer after some of his cows strayed onto the couple’s land. They subsequently had a discussion about the boundary, but no agreement was reached as to its location. The couple appointed an expert who arranged for a detailed land survey to be conducted. They then applied to the Land Registry for a determination of the exact line of a section of the boundary. The farmer objected, and the application was referred to the FTT.

The boundary contended for by the couple broadly followed the southern edge of a drainage ditch before traversing some dew ponds. It had been identified by overlaying the title plan for their home onto the land survey. The farmer maintained that a line of fencing on the northern side of the ditch marked the boundary. He gave evidence that the fencing had been in place when he bought the land and he had believed at the time that it represented the boundary.

After concluding that neither historical Ordnance Survey mapping of the site nor the verbal description of the land that was sold to the farmer provided much assistance, the FTT found that a reasonable third party going to the site in January 2005 would have identified the line of fencing on the northern side of the ditch, or the mid-line of the ditch and the dew ponds, as the intended boundary line. However, the mid-line of the ditch would have been difficult to identify, and it seemed improbable that the parties would have intended to put a boundary through the middle of the dew ponds. On balance, the FTT considered the boundary to be along the line of fencing. The FTT directed the Land Registry to cancel the couple’s application.