A £500,000 dispute between neighbours that caused Court of Appeal judges to despair over the money wasted will not be incurring additional expense at the Supreme Court.
The court has refused permission to appeal in the case, which had been branded by the Court of Appeal as a “grossly disproportionate” dispute between neighbours that had taken up more court time than many murder trials, and led the total legal costs bill to spiral to more than half a million pounds.
Lords Neuberger, Wilson and Carnwath found that the case raised no arguable point of law, meaning that the Court of Appeal decision will stand.
In a January judgment, the court gave its ruling in a battle between neighbours in Mobberley, Cheshire, and expressed frustration over the courts’ inability to prevent feuding litigants wasting time and money in this way.
Sir Stanley Burnton said: “This is a depressingly unfortunate dispute between neighbours. The costs so far approach half a million pounds, far more than the value of the rights involved. It is a dispute that could and should have been compromised on terms that both parties could live with.”
Bean LJ said that he was dismayed by this “Dickensian litigation”, while Christopher Clarke LJ expressed the hope that the example of this litigation may encourage others “to take every step that they can to avoid the absurd waste of effort, time and cost (for both parties) which this case has involved”.
The court allowed an appeal by Adrian and Joanne Hodgson in respect of a declaration of the true boundary of the neighbouring property, Fiveacres, owned by Richard and Heidi Gilks, and in respect of one right of way the Gilks claimed over the Hodgsons’ land.
However, it dismissed the Hodgsons’ appeal in respect of a second right of way, which means that the Gilks remain entitled to access Fiveacres across their neighbours’ property.
The Hodgsons had applied for permission to appeal that aspect of the decision.
Gilks and anr v Hodgson and anr Supreme Court (Lords Neuberger, Wilson and Carnwath)
