Boundary Agreements and Successors

Where adjoining land owners reach an agreement about the location of the boundary (and don't wish to engage in a Determined Boundary application), such agreements are known as “boundary agreements”. Boundary agreements take effect without the need for registration at the Land Registry and – even when new agreements are reached - are said to be based on the legal fiction that the agreement represents the “true and ancient” limits of each title (per Neilson v Poole (1969) 20 P&CR 909.)

In the case of White v Adler [2025] EWCA Civ 392, Mr White was the registered freehold owner of a house and land in Essex. Mr and Mrs Adler were his neighbours. They purchased their properties at around the same time. Their respective predecessors in title had an agreement (partly oral and partly in writing) about the location of the boundary between the properties. In 2016, Mr White commenced works on the boundary which Mr and Mrs Adler considered to be inconsistent with the boundary agreement. They issued proceedings in trespass. Mr White defended those proceedings, amongst other things, by disputing that either party was bound by the boundary agreement concluded between their respective predecessors. The District Judge found for Mr and Mrs Adler, which decision was upheld by the Circuit Judge.

The Court of Appeal dismissed a second appeal. The agreement had been reached in order to define a previously unclear or uncertain boundary and was akin to a contractual agreement (consideration being the avoidance of future disputes or risk). Such an agreement, whether written or oral, bound successors in title because, in law, it was treated as evidence of where the boundary had always been and therefore it limited what land any successor could have purchased. It followed that the agreement also took effect without notice or registration.

For advice on boundary disputes and issues, please contact Oliver Kew at o.kew@hewetts.co.uk.

Published on 21/05/2025