Home Page > Monthly Update > Boundaries and adverse possession.

Home Page
Contact
Editorial Team

Boundaries and adverse possession.
Business lease renewal.
Co-ownership and estoppel.
Easements.
Landlord and tenant (general).
Long leases.
Mobile homes.
Mortgages.
Nuisance and trespass.
Planning.
Property litigation and ADR.
Property transactions.
Public access to land.
Residential tenancies.
Restrictive covenants.

Current page






Boundaries and adverse possession.

The editor of this section of the site is Samantha Jackson of 1 Chancery Lane, London.



There are two cases this month:
  • A successful application for costs in relation to a Party Wall injunction application, partly on an indemnity basis.
  • The court determined the boundary and construed the meaning of an easement. The trial judge’s interventions during the evidence did not mean that there had not been a fair trial.




Party Wall Act 1996

Injunctions and costs

Heathcote v Doal
[2017] EWHC B8 (TCC)

Summary

Successful application by the claimants for orders for costs from an injunction granted to them to prevent the defendants from continuing with excavation works where they had failed to serve appropriate notices pursuant to the Party Wall Act 1996.

Facts

On the 7 November 2016 the defendants’ (D’s) builders started substantial excavation works affecting the party wall sitting on the floor slab which was common to both D and the claimants’ (C’s) properties. No notices had been served under the Party Wall Act 1996. C advised D that this was necessary.

On the 15 November 2016, C received a letter from a firm providing architectural and consultancy services to D (IDA) stating that the excavations were within 3 metres of C’s property, were expected to commence in the near future and included a purported s6 Party Wall Act 1996 notice. This was not accompanied by any plans and sections showing the site and depth of any excavation D proposed to make, as provided by section 6(6) of the Act. D then served an amended notice and acrimonious correspondence between the parties continued.

C made an application for an injunction without notice, which was heard on 15th December 2016, when an order was made in C’s favour. On the return date of 22nd December 2016 the injunction was ordered to continue in force until the 31st January 2017. The matter was also to be listed for further consideration by the Court on the 31st January 2017 where costs were to be dealt with.

D then instructed a replacement firm of con ... THIS IS AN EXTRACT OF THE FULL TEXT. TO GET THE FULL TEXT, SEE BELOW

Existing members, to login click => here
If you have found this page useful, you may be interested in the following:

Options
Free Summaries £nil
Full Membership From £207 + VAT (1 year)