Our client purchased a new home and soon after moving in he erected a fence around part of his garden. Our client’s neighbour objected to the erection of the fence and made an application to the Land Registry to be registered as the owner of part of the garden on the basis that he and his tenants had used and occupied it as if it were there own for 10 years.
The application for ownership had been prepared in considerable detail and was supported by a number of statutory declarations (a type of witness statement) as well as photographs which gave the impression that the garden was an integral part of the neighbouring property. Our client’s neighbour claimed that the garden had originally been let from a previous owner but that once permission had been withdrawn he had used and maintained it. The application had been filed soon after our client had completed the purchase of his property and appeared to have been timed to take advantage of our clients’ relative unfamiliarity with the way that the garden had been used.
Although our clients’ neighbour had filed a very substantial application, we noticed that it failed to explain how our client’s neighbour had once leased the land that he was now claiming and also claim that the same land was his due a mistaken apprehension as to the position of the boundary. We filed a response to the application making this very argument and the Land Registry agreed that the application was misconceived. The attempt to claim title to our client’s garden was rejected without this matter being referred to the court for determination. Our client has now filed a submission to the Land Registry to claim the costs that it was forced to incur in dealing with his neighbours application.