In Weaver v. Anderson (Ont CA, 2017) the Court of Appeal comments on the basis upon which property boundaries may be established:
[6] Third, the appellant contends that the application judge failed to apply proper legal principles in establishing the boundary. We see no basis for this complaint. The application judge identified the leading cases of Thelland v. Golden Haulage Ltd., [1989] O.J. No. 2303 (Dist. Ct.), and Nicholson v. Halliday (2005), 2005 CanLII 259 (ON CA), 74 O.R. (3d) 81 (C.A). He applied the principles expressed in those cases that in the absence of natural boundaries or original monuments, “fences or possession that can reasonably be related back to the time of the original survey” are more compelling evidence of the boundary than measurements.
[7] There was, therefore, both an evidentiary basis and a legal basis for the application judge’s rejection of the “White line” and his acceptance of the fence line as the more reliable evidence of the boundary.
The author has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this Isthatlegal.ca webpage.
