Determining the true and ancient limits—why boundary agreements always bind successors in title (White v Alder)
Property Disputes analysis: The case involved a written boundary demarcation agreement entered into by two neighbours shortly before they each sold their respective properties. The subsequent owners found themselves in a dispute about the same boundary. The respondents, the Alders, sought to rely on the agreement, but the appellant, Mr White, argued that as a successor in title he was not bound by it—either at all or because he had no knowledge of it. The Court of Appeal unanimously dismissed the appeal. Lady Justice Asplin, with whom Lord Justice Zacaroli and Sir Launcelot Henderson agreed, held that a boundary agreement binds successors in title because of its very nature. It delineates a boundary and therefore defines the property that can be transferred or conveyed. Since no one can transfer or convey more land than they own, a boundary agreement binds successors in title whether or not they know about it. Written by Tanita Cross, barrister at Exchange Chambers.