News
05 Feb 2026
A Q&A with Paul Lovelock, Director, Hollis.
Boundaries are everywhere. Walk down almost any street and you will pass dozens of them. Most are never questioned, yet many have the potential to become disputes when a property is sold, a fence is replaced, or a development is proposed.
Boundary disputes remain one of the most misunderstood areas of property ownership. They appear physical and visible, but, in legal terms, they are neither. It is the gap between what people can see on the ground and what the legal documents actually establish that frequently turns long-held assumptions into formal disagreements.
Here, Paul Lovelock, Director at Hollis, explains how boundary disputes arise, why they are so often misunderstood, and how independent expert evidence can assist parties, solicitors and the courts in determining the position and alignment of a boundary.
What actually causes boundary disputes, and are they on the rise?
Most boundary disputes arise from an allegation of trespass or a belief that a neighbour is occupying or using land that does not belong to them. That immediately raises the question of where the legal boundary actually lies.
Because England and Wales operate a system of general boundaries, there is no definitive national register that records the precise position of every property boundary. As a result, if a dispute arises, the position of the boundary must be established by considering the specific evidence available in each individual case.
It is also not uncommon for issues relating to adverse possession to arise alongside boundary disputes. Whether such claims have merit often depends upon the true position of the boundary and the history of occupation and use of the land in question.
I would be cautious about suggesting there has been a significant increase in boundary disputes. In my experience, they have always been a feature of property ownership. Boundaries are ever-present and their positions of most are never challenged , but events such as property sales, redevelopment works or the replacement of boundary structures can bring competing assumptions into sharp focus. Their occurrence is generally driven by circumstance rather than any particular trend.
Are boundary disputes becoming more complex?
Not necessarily in legal terms. The principles governing boundary determination are well established and have developed over many years. Equally, the role of an Expert Witness and the nature of expert evidence required by the courts remains largely unchanged. The RICS has issued guidance in the form of its Professional Standard entitled Boundaries: procedures for boundary identification, demarcation and dispute resolution, 4th edition.
What has become more complex is the environment surrounding many boundaries. While the legal boundary itself cannot change its position, the physical features (man-made and natural) associated with it often do. Fences, walls, hedges and buildings may be removed, altered or replaced over time. Large land areas may be subdivided, resulting in the creation of new boundaries, while historical documentation may be incomplete, ambiguous or unavailable.
The challenge often lies in interpreting physical change against the available documentary evidence of the boundary’s position. The complexity varies from case to case, but the underlying principles remain the same. Where disputes become particularly entrenched, it is often human emotion, long-standing neighbour relationships and competing assumptions that create difficulty rather than the legal principles themselves.
Why are boundaries so often misunderstood?
A common misconception is that Land Registry title plans precisely identify legal boundaries. In reality, title plans are generally prepared for title identification purposes only and do not define the exact position of a boundary.
People also tend to think of a boundary as a physical feature. In law, however, a boundary is a legal construct. It is the invisible line at which one person’s legal rights over land end and another’s begin.
Fences, walls and hedges may provide clues as to where a boundary lies, but they are not necessarily the boundary itself. They are often simply physical features erected by individuals who believed the boundary to be in a particular location. In some cases, they may accurately reflect the legal line; in others they may not.
Many disputes arise because both parties genuinely believe they are correct, basing their assumptions on physical features that may never have been reliable indicators of the legal boundary in the first place.
What does it take to establish where a boundary lies?
Establishing a boundary generally requires two key elements.
The first is an accurate topographical survey and survey drawing. This provides an objective record of the physical features that exist on the ground at the time of the dispute, including buildings, walls, fences, hedges, changes in level and other relevant features.
The second is a careful analysis of the available evidence. This typically includes title documents, conveyances and transfers (Intrinsic evidence), together with historical information such as photographs, plans, maps, parish records and other archival material.
The survey provides the factual foundation. The expert’s role is then to analyse the available intrinsic and extrinsic evidence and form an independent opinion as to the most likely position of the legal boundary. That opinion can then be plotted onto the survey drawing and explained through a reasoned report.
The strongest outcomes are often achieved when specialists remain within their respective areas of expertise. Land surveyors provide accurate spatial information and drawings, while boundary experts analyse the legal and historical evidence and apply their professional opinion to the survey.
Ultimately, the weight that can be attached to an expert report depends on the quality of the available evidence, the depth of the analysis undertaken and the logic and transparency of the conclusions reached.
Why is independence so important, and when should an expert be brought in?
The overriding duty of an Expert Witness is to the court, not to the party who instructs them or pays their fees. The purpose of expert evidence is to assist the court by providing an independent and objective opinion within the expert’s field of expertise.
That independence is fundamental. An expert is not an advocate for their client and should not seek to shape their opinion to support a particular outcome. If the available evidence does not support a client’s position, that should be communicated clearly and at the earliest opportunity.
In litigation, experienced lawyers and judges are able to identify expert evidence that lacks impartiality and objectivity. Once an expert’s independence is called into question, the credibility and value of their evidence will be significantly diminished.
From a practical perspective, it is often preferable for a client to receive a robust and impartial assessment of their position at an early stage rather than discover weaknesses in their case much later during litigation.
As for timing, earlier is generally better. Independent expert advice obtained before positions become entrenched can often narrow the issues in dispute and, in some cases, help avoid litigation altogether. Early instruction also provides sufficient time for detailed historical research, which can be critical in boundary matters.
What do owners most often misunderstand about going to court?
Many owners assume that a judge will personally investigate the matter, visit the site and determine exactly where the boundary should be located.
In reality, the court’s role is different. The English legal system is adversarial rather than inquisitorial. Judges do not conduct their own investigations or establish a boundary position independently. Instead, they evaluate the evidence presented by the parties and determine which evidence they find most reliable, persuasive and helpful.
As a result, the quality of the expert evidence can play a significant role in influencing the court’s determination.
Boundary disputes also tend to be highly emotional. Private owners can become deeply invested in what may appear to others to be a relatively small area of land. Commercial property owners, developers and institutional investors are often able to adopt a more commercial approach, which can make negotiated settlements easier to achieve.
How can disputes be resolved before they escalate?
The first step is often the simplest: communication. Neighbours should attempt to discuss the issue and review any available title documentation before assumptions become fixed positions.
Where agreement cannot be reached, an independent expert opinion obtained outside formal litigation can often provide clarity and assist both parties in understanding the strengths and weaknesses of their respective positions.
If agreement is eventually reached, it is sensible to formally record the outcome. A Land Registry-compliant boundary plan supporting an application for a determined or agreed boundary can provide certainty and reduce the risk of future disputes.
The common thread throughout all of these approaches is straightforward: maintain dialogue, act early and rely on evidence rather than assumption.
Can you give an example of a dispute where what appeared obvious on site turned out to be wrong? Or, Have you encountered cases where historical evidence proved decisive?
In Lee James Bootle -v- GHL Property Management & Development Ltd and FI Real Estate Management Ltd [2025] EWHC 317 (Ch) and my evidence demonstrated that the extant bed of a stream and an extant tree/bush line could not be used to reliably locate the position of the disputed boundary. My evidence relied on a 1929 Conveyance, historic Ordnance Surveyor maps from the 19th century the then current Ordnance Survey Mastermap (on which a parish boundary line was still marked) and the mering notes of a 19th century Victorian borough surveyor annotated in the original mereing book held in the National Archives in London.
My opinion of the boundary position (accepted by the court) was referenced against the document and still mapped parish boundary using the 1929 conveyance and dimensions written in the borough surveyor’s original mereing book.
Have there been any recent developments in boundary law or practice that owners and solicitors should be aware of?
I am not aware of any boundary principles are well established in English law.
Final thoughts
Boundary disputes are about far more than lines on plans. They often involve emotion, history, differing interpretations of evidence and strongly held beliefs about ownership.
The lesson for property owners, developers, solicitors and advisers is consistent. Do not assume that a fence, wall or hedge necessarily marks the legal boundary. Establish what the documentary evidence suggests, understand the available facts and seek independent expert advice as early as possible.
In many cases, that approach helps resolve disputes before they reach court. Where litigation cannot be avoided, it places the parties in the strongest possible position to present clear, objective and well-reasoned evidence.
Paul Lovelock is a Chartered Building Surveyor and Director at Hollis, specialising in Neighbourly Matters, Property Disputes and Expert Witness services. He advises solicitors, developers, landowners and private clients on party wall matters, boundary disputes, rights of light, rights of way and other property-related disputes, and provides independent expert evidence in litigation proceedings.