header-logo header-logo

04 July 2025 / Edward Blakeney , Ashpen Rajah
Issue: 8123 / Categories: Features , Property
printer mail-detail

Ignorance is not bliss

224741
When ‘I didn’t know’ doesn’t cut it: Edward Blakeney & Ashpen Rajah examine boundary agreements which bind successors in title
  • A boundary agreement will bind successors in title irrespective of their (the successors’) knowledge.
  • That is the case for binding agreements that are express and those that are inferred.
  • This result flows from the nature of boundary agreements, which delineate the property transferred for all purposes.

In Neilson v Poole (1969) 20 P & CR 909, Mr Justice Megarry observed that a boundary agreement is ‘an act of peace, quieting strife and averting litigation and so is to be favoured in the law’. The Court of Appeal’s recent decision in White v Alder [2025] EWCA Civ 392 upholds the utility of these agreements by confirming that a boundary demarcation agreement is binding on successors in title, whether or not they had knowledge of it when purchasing.

The facts in White v Alder

The parties were neighbours. Mr White was the owner of ‘Willow Cottage’ and Professor

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll