There is a rebuttable presumption that a border agreement does not involve a transfer of land and that the agreed position is consistent with the true position of the legal border. The presumption is not rebutted solely on the grounds of « circumstances of doubt or uncertainty » as to whether or not it is a transfer of land. See Neilson v Poole (1969) 20 P&CR 909 at 918 and 919. However, if the agreed position differed from that indicated in a title plan, the agreement can only have identified the current position of the legal limit if the agreed position falls within the scope of the general rule of limits: see practice guide 77: Modification of the register by removing land from a title plan. The land registry judge, who initially took up the case, decided that the applicants had indeed acquired the property through prejudicial property. However, the adjudicator decided not to amend the property register to designate the applicants as incumbents. This is because the parties had a meeting at which they reached an oral agreement to jeopardize their dispute, granting the agreement that the defendants could retain the majority of the country. A court may make a statement about the legal boundary between two or more properties. The court also has the power to award damages or order an injunction to prevent intrusion and/or intervention. Upon receipt of the application or after being investigated under Rule 17 of the Land Code 2003, the declarant must decide: if he is satisfied that: (i) the plan or plan and verbal description identify the exact line of the claimed boundary, (ii) the applicant has demonstrated that the exact line of the boundary is in the position indicated and (iii) they (the Registrar) can identify all the owners of the land adjacent to the border and have an address in which any owner can be terminated. If this is done, the declarant must inform the adjacent owner(s) of the application, unless the evidence cited and presented in the application contains a written agreement with the adjacent owner on the boundary line or a court decision fixing the boundary line. Table 9 of Form DB must be completed when the adjacent owner objects. The registrant must cancel the application if it is not met in points (i), (ii) and (iii).

For unregistered land, the legal description of the boundary must be found in the plot clause (or on the plan mentioned in the plot clause) of the corresponding transfer deed. The law allows neighboring landowners, if the description of the boundary in the deed of ownership (or deed of transfer) is unclear, to agree on the exact position of the boundary between their country in order to clarify the description of the deed of ownership. It should be stressed that the purpose of this agreement must be to describe an existing boundary and not to be used as a means of land transfer (for which a deed of transmission or an act of transmission must be issued by a lawyer or a registered intermediary). Neighbors might want their common border to be in a certain position, for example to allow easy access to vehicles or build an extension. . . .