A homeowner in Torquay, England, lost an appeal over the precise position of a hedge boundary between her property and that of her neighbor, resulting in a legal battle costing £108,402 upfront. The dispute began when Ms Douglas argued for the boundary to run along the outer edge of the hedge rather than through where it stood. After considering evidence from surveyors and visiting the properties himself, Judge Mitchell ruled in favor of Mr Channon based on the principle that minor differences are insignificant under law, leading to a court decision against Ms Douglas.
Written locally by qwen2.5:14b on 2026-10-07,
using this article's own text rather than the other coverage of the
same event (that is the story summary below).
The legal dispute centred on a hedge separating two homes in Torquay, England, with a disagreement over a few millimetres of land eventually turning into a costly court battle.
asserted
disagreement → centre → battle
A homeowner who lost an appeal over the precise position of the boundary between her property and her neighbour’s has been ordered to pay £108,402 upfront towards 70% of his legal costs, as per court documents.
asserted
who → lose → documents
The case involved Ms Douglas, owner of 43 Mead Road, and Mr Channon, who owns the neighbouring No. 41.
asserted
who → involve → No
Their disagreement concerned whether the boundary ran along the outer edge of a hedge or through the area where the hedge stood.
asserted
hedge → concern → area
Court rules on hedge boundary
The dispute reached Plymouth County Court, where a trial was held from August 18 to 26 last year.
asserted
trial → rule → year
Judge Mitchell considered evidence from surveyors, photographs and other material before determining the boundary.
asserted
Mitchell → consider → boundary
Mr Channon’s expert, civil engineer Mr Barber, had identified a line known as A-H-B as the boundary between the properties.
asserted
expert → identify → properties
Ms Douglas argued that the boundary should instead run along the hedge’s outer edge because she maintained that the hedge belonged to her property.
asserted
hedge → argue → property
The hedge had already been removed, making it impossible for the court to examine its exact position.
asserted
court → remove → position
The judge considered the legal principles governing boundaries formed by hedges.
asserted
judge → consider → hedges
He found that where a hedge belongs to one property, the boundary would generally follow the outer edge of its stems or trunks, rather than the furthest point reached by its leaves.
asserted
boundary → find → leaves
However, the judge found that the difference between that position and Mr Barber’s A-H-B line was only a matter of millimetres.
asserted
difference → find → millimetres
He therefore applied the legal principle of
de minimis, which means a difference is so small that the law treats it as insignificant, and declared A-H-B to be the boundary.
asserted
B → apply → it
Homeowner challenges the decision
Ms Douglas appealed, arguing that the trial judge had identified one boundary under the applicable legal principle but then adopted a slightly different line as the property's actual boundary.
asserted
judge → challenge → boundary
Her lawyers also argued that experts should first have been required to establish the precise legal boundary.
asserted
experts → argue → boundary
If they could not agree, they said, the court could then have considered the issue at another hearing.
uncertain
court → agree → hearing
The Court of Appeal rejected those arguments.
asserted
Court → reject → arguments
The appeal court noted that the trial judge had considered the expert evidence, photographs and other material and had personally visited the properties.
asserted
judge → note → properties
It found that he was entitled to conclude that the difference between the competing lines was only a few millimetres.
asserted
difference → find → lines
The court also rejected the argument that the ruling effectively deprived Ms Douglas of part of her property.
asserted
ruling → reject → property
Any difference in the amount of land involved was considered too small to have legal significance.
asserted
difference → involve → significance
Other claims added to the dispute
The boundary was only one part of the wider case.
uncertain
boundary → add → case
Ms Douglas had also brought allegations involving trespass and nuisance against Mr Channon and a previous owner.
asserted
Douglas → bring → Channon
She sought damages and other remedies, including claims related to work that she said had destabilised her land.
uncertain
she → seek → land
Mr Channon denied the allegations and filed counterclaims of his own.
asserted
Channon → deny → own
They included claims involving nuisance, trespass, alleged harassment and the value of his property.
uncertain
They → include → property
His counterclaim was worth more than £200,000, although much of it was unsuccessful.
The judge also found that Ms Douglas's main claim had failed, including her allegations concerning stabilisation work.
uncertain
claim → find → work
Appeal court upholds £108,402 costs order
asserted
court → uphold → order
Ms Douglas argued that she should not have to pay such a large share of Mr Channon's legal expenses because she had successfully defeated most of his counterclaim.
asserted
she → argue → counterclaim
The Court of Appeal disagreed.
asserted
Court → disagree → Appeal
It said judges can consider which party succeeded on the main issues, how much those issues contributed to the overall case and how the litigation was conducted.
asserted
litigation → say → case
The trial judge had already taken Mr Channon's unsuccessful counterclaims into account when deciding the costs.
asserted
judge → take → costs
Instead of making Ms Douglas responsible for all of Mr Channon's costs, the judge ordered her to pay 70%.
asserted
her → make → %
The Court of Appeal dismissed her appeal, leaving both the boundary ruling and the costs order in place.
asserted
Court → dismiss → place
Ms Douglas must therefore pay £108,402 upfront towards Mr Channon's costs, with the final amount to be determined under the 70% order.
asserted
amount → pay → order
The court battle ultimately turned on a boundary difference measured in millimetres, but the wider litigation involved expert evidence, multiple claims and substantial legal costs.
uncertain
litigation → turn → evidence
The Aporia
