establishing the accurate boundary line. When dimensions have been entered on to
a plan, this is not always conclusive, as the Court of Appeal has previously ruled that, generally, dimensions cited on a plan might not be more accurate than a line on a plan. Any confl ict should be resolved by reference to external evidence. Where a plan based on an Ordnance Survey (OS)
map has been used as the basis of a conveyance or transfer, the OS map rules usually prevail over other presumptions that may otherwise have applied. Assuming that the exact boundary line has
been established through either the title deeds, inferences drawn from topographical features or intrinsic evidence, what if there still appears to be a ransom strip over which rights need to be exercised?
Considerations before paying for rights of way One way of avoiding the need to pay for the
necessary rights over a ransom strip is the ad medium fi lum rule, which assumes the boundary of land abutting a roadway or private right of way extends up to the half-way point to the road. In Berridge v Ward (1861) 142 E.R.507, this was
defi ned as: ‘Where a piece of land which adjoins a highway is conveyed by general words, the presumption of law is, that the soil of the highway usque ad medium fi lum (up to the medium line) passes by the conveyance, even though reference is made to a plan annexed, the measurement and colouring of which would exclude it.’ T is presumption is strong and will apply even though the conveyance or transfer refers to the land as being bounded by the roadway in question. In registered land, however, no part of a registered
highway is shown as being within a registered owner’s title, even where the presumption of 50% ownership applies. T e ‘hedge to hedge’ presumption also needs
to be considered in respect of roadways, which presumes a highway extends to the whole width of the space between fences on either side of the highway and not just the constructed roadway itself. If the gap between the land and the public
highway is, say, a grass verge, have the actions of the council implied that the gap is in fact public highway? Does the council mow the grass? Have flowers been planted on the verge? If
the answer is yes, it may be safe to presume that through the actions of the council, what may have been previously thought to have been a ransom strip is in fact public highway.
If in doubt seek expert advice A fi nal point to consider that might help with the occasional issue is the doctrine of accretion, when the eff ects of natural forces, such as winds and tides, cause a gradual increase or decrease in the amount of land - the legal boundary of the aff ected land is adjusted accordingly. Hopefully, property developers now recognise
that ransom strips, some of which may have been caused by inaccuracy with land boundaries, are not always the problem they fi rst appear. But as you might expect, we recommend you
seek expert legal advice from lawyers well-versed in the issue of boundaries, ransom strips and other commercial property issues, as a small expense at the start could save much larger bills later in the development.
Contact Taylor Walton on 01582 731161 or visit
www.taylorwalton.com
ALL THINGS BUSINESS
7
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50
