A measurement of "15 feet" written on a deed plan was not enough to fix a garden boundary, and the homeowners who relied on it ended up paying their neighbours' costs. That is the short version of Cunningham v Holehouse (neutral citation 2026 UKFTT 771 (PC)), a decision of the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber, Land Registration Division) handed down on 1 May 2026 and widely reported by property lawyers over the summer [1][2][3]. For anyone in Kingston upon Thames considering a determined boundary application, the case is a timely warning about what the tribunal actually looks at, and about the limits of even a well-prepared expert surveyor's plan.
Key Takeaways
- A determined boundary application asks HM Land Registry to record the exact line of a boundary; most registered titles show only a "general boundary" under section 60 of the Land Registration Act 2002.
- In Cunningham v Holehouse the applicants relied on an expert plan and a deed measurement, but the tribunal gave more weight to a shed, a carport, a fence and historic aerial photographs [1][2].
- The application was cancelled, the title stayed subject to the general boundaries rule, and the unsuccessful applicants were ordered to pay the other side's costs [1][2].
- A determined boundary should only be pursued where the evidence clearly supports the precise line claimed [3].
- From 30 November 2026 surveyor expert reports must also meet the new RICS Surveyors acting as expert witnesses standard [4].
What a determined boundary application is
Almost every registered title plan in England and Wales shows the boundary as a red line drawn on an Ordnance Survey base. Under section 60 of the Land Registration Act 2002, that line is a general boundary only: it indicates roughly where the boundary runs but does not fix its exact position.
A determined boundary application is the formal route to certainty. The owner applies to HM Land Registry under the Land Registration Rules 2003 with a plan drawn to Land Registry's accuracy requirements, usually prepared by a chartered surveyor from a measured survey. Land Registry notifies the neighbour. If the neighbour objects and the dispute cannot be resolved, the application is referred to the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber), which decides whether the line on the plan is correct.
In Kingston, Surbiton and New Malden, where long rear gardens behind Victorian and Edwardian terraces and inter-war semis are often divided by old fences, hedges and outbuildings, these applications tend to surface when someone plans a side-return extension, a new garden room or a replacement fence and discovers that the neighbours disagree about where the line runs. A guide to the surveyor's role in these situations is available at boundary dispute and party wall surveyors in London.
Cunningham v Holehouse: the facts
Mr and Mrs Cunningham applied for a determined boundary between their land and that of their neighbours, Mr and Mrs Holehouse, supported by an expert surveyor's plan [1][2].
The boundary had been created by a 1987 conveyance. The plan attached to that conveyance was wrong, so in 2000 a deed of rectification replaced it, and the deed plan was treated as the conveyance plan. The deed plan carried the words "Distance B-C-15 feet". The Cunninghams argued that this measurement fixed the boundary [1].
The Holehouses ran two arguments. The first, that their boundary pre-dated 1987 and had never formed part of the original estate, was rejected. The second succeeded: a shed and a carport already stood on the ground in 1987, and the parties to the conveyance could not have intended the boundary to pass through them [1][2].
Each side instructed its own expert, and the experts reached different views [1]. The tribunal's reasoning, however, rested mainly on aerial photographs showing the shed, carport and fence over time, and on witness evidence about what was on the land around 1987 [1].
What the tribunal decided
The tribunal accepted that the boundary originated from the 1987 conveyance as rectified in 2000, but it did not treat the 15-foot measurement as conclusive. The plan was expressly stated to be "for identification purposes only", which showed it was never intended to be precise [1][2].
A reasonable person looking at the land in 1987 would have treated the existing shed and carport as lying within the strip of land, not as cut in two by the boundary. [1]
The fence, which the conveyance required to be erected and which was replaced by a hedge in 2002, was found to have been put up after the conveyance to mark the boundary [1]. Because the Cunninghams' application did not seek a boundary matching these findings, the application was cancelled. The title remains subject to the general boundaries rule, and the Cunninghams were ordered to pay the Holehouses' costs. The tribunal also encouraged the parties to settle [1].
Why the expert plan did not carry the day in this determined boundary application
The case is not an argument against instructing a surveyor. The expert plan correctly identified the 1987 conveyance as the origin of the boundary, and the tribunal agreed [2]. The problem was that the application asked the tribunal to adopt one precise line, derived from a measurement on a plan marked "for identification purposes only", when the physical evidence pointed to a slightly different line.
A good boundary surveyor's report for a Kingston property therefore does more than measure. It should:
- Trace the conveyancing history to the deed that first created the boundary.
- Explain the status of every plan, including any "for identification only" wording and any rectification.
- Record the physical features on the ground, such as fences, hedges, walls, sheds and outbuildings, and date them where possible.
- Use historic aerial photographs and Ordnance Survey editions to show how those features have changed, an approach explained in satellite imagery in property surveying.
- Present a measured survey with coordinates, as described in GPS in boundary disputes.
- Set out alternative lines where the evidence is capable of more than one reading, and say which is preferred and why.
That last point is now a formal requirement for RICS members giving expert evidence.
Expert evidence and the RICS standard that takes effect on 30 November 2026
In boundary litigation a chartered surveyor's expert report must comply with Part 35 of the Civil Procedure Rules. The expert's overriding duty is to the court, the report must contain a statement of truth, and the court's permission is needed before a party may rely on it.
From 30 November 2026 the RICS professional standard Surveyors acting as expert witnesses (5th edition, published 30 July 2026) adds further obligations [4]. Experts must identify every assumption, set out alternative conclusions where their opinion depends on disputed facts, disclose any use of AI in preparing their evidence, disclose any financial dependence on the instructing party, and never act as an advocate for the client's position [4]. Had those requirements applied in Cunningham v Holehouse, the applicants' expert report would have been expected to address the shed and carport as an alternative scenario rather than treating the 15-foot measurement as decisive.
Kingston Surveyors provides this type of evidence through its boundary dispute expert witness service in London.
Alternatives to a determined boundary application
Practitioners note that determined boundary applications rarely reach the tribunal, and that the costs risk is real. Land registration cases do not follow the usual cost-neutral approach: the unsuccessful party normally pays the successful party's costs, as the Cunninghams discovered [1][3]. Owners should weigh the evidence carefully before applying, and a preliminary boundary survey is often the most cost-effective way to test whether an application is likely to succeed.
Frequently asked questions
Does my title plan show the exact boundary?
No. Unless a determined boundary has been registered, the red line is a general boundary only under section 60 of the Land Registration Act 2002.
Can I rely on a measurement written on an old deed plan?
Not on its own. In Cunningham v Holehouse a 15-foot measurement was treated as indicative only because the plan was "for identification purposes only" [1].
Who pays if my determined boundary application fails?
In land registration cases the unsuccessful party usually pays the successful party's costs, so a failed application can be expensive [1][3].
Conclusion
Cunningham v Holehouse confirms that a determined boundary application stands or falls on the whole body of evidence: the deeds, the plans and their wording, the physical features that existed when the boundary was created, historic photographs and witness recollection [1][2]. An expert plan is essential, but it has to engage with all of that material and set out the alternatives honestly, which is exactly what the RICS expert witness standard will require from 30 November 2026 [4].
Kingston homeowners who are unsure where a boundary runs should gather their deeds, photograph the existing features, and instruct a chartered surveyor to assess the evidence before deciding between a boundary agreement, mediation or a formal application. This article is general information rather than legal advice; anyone in a live dispute should take advice from a solicitor and a chartered surveyor.
References
- General Boundaries Rule Succeeds in Boundary Dispute Between Neighbours. charlesrussellspeechlys.com.
- The Red Line Isnt Always Right Lessons From a Boundary Dispute. wilkinchapmanrollits.co.uk.
- Search. caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk.
- Surveyors Acting as Expert Witnesses. rics.org.
