U.K. CADASTRAL PLANS AND THE LAW-THE SIGNIFICANCE OF LEE v. BARREY

Author: Barrett M. M.  

Publisher: Maney Publishing

ISSN: 1752-2706

Source: Survey Review, Vol.26, Iss.205, 1982-07, pp. : 337-342

Disclaimer: Any content in publications that violate the sovereignty, the constitution or regulations of the PRC is not accepted or approved by CNPIEC.

Previous Menu Next

Abstract

In many countries it is quite clear which documents are authoritative for describing property boundaries and who are the proper people to interpret them. In South Africa, for instance, the primary document is the survey diagram supported by field notes and calculations lodged in the Surveyor General's office and interpreters have to be fully qualified and registered land surveyors. Solicitors, estate agents, building or valuation surveyors would never presume to act as interpreters. In Holland, New Zealand and many other places the situation is similar. But not in England, not even for registered land. In the case Lee v. Barrey (Court of Appeal (1957) Ch 251), the defendants argued that the “filed plan”, the plan prepared by the Land Registry was the authoritative document describing the boundary and, by implication, that the Land Registry was the authoritative interpreter of the boundaries. It was held, very emphatically that this was not so.