Couple sues neighbour alleging actions may scupper home sale

Plans to move halted after claim boundary between properties is in the wrong place

The neighbour was n claiming the boundary was in the wrong place and should be moved a further 2m into the Archer’s property. This counsel said would ‘put the boundary in the Archer’s kitchen’.

A Co Dublin couple has launched High Court proceedings against their neighbour whose actions they allege may scupper plans to sell their current home.

The action has been been brought by Allan and Rosemary Archer who the High Court heard have entered into contracts to sell their property Deebert, Brookstone Road in Baldoyle Dublin and purchase a new house in Sutton.

However the Archer’s barrister Breffni Gordan BL said their plans to move home have had to be halted after their neighbour Anne Madden of Brookstone Lodge Brookstone Road Baldolye claimed the boundary between their properties is in the wrong place and that part of her property is within the Archer’s site.

Because of this claim, formally sent to the Archers through Ms Madden’s solicitors on September 21st last, counsel said the contract of sale cannot be completed.


Counsel said the Archers reject Ms Madden’s claim about the boundary, which Mr Gordan said is “unstateable”. What she has done is a slander against the Archer’s title, counsel said.

Counsel said the case “was not a classic boundary dispute.” Counsel said in 2008 a boundary fence was constructed between the properties at Ms Madden’s request.

The boundary counsel said was “marked out” by an engineer hired Ms Madden. In addition she had paid for the construction of the boundary itself.

Counsel said Ms Madden was now claiming the boundary was in the wrong place and should be moved a further 2m into the Archer’s property. This counsel said would “put the boundary in the Archer’s kitchen”.

Counsel added that Ms Madden is also in dispute over the boundary with a hardware store located on the other side of her property.

If the boundary on that property is where Ms Madden claims it is counsel the boundary should be located where the hardware stores has its cash register.

Counsel said the Archers are obliged to inform the buyer of their property about the letter concerning the boundary are very upset over the claim which came “out of the blue.”

The Archers and their two children after placing the house on the market last April and agreeing the sale last July have packed up their belongings and are currently “living out of boxes,” in advance of their planned move to Sutton.

Counsel said through their solicitors the Archers asked that the letter sent to them be formally withdrawn, but Ms Madden has refused to do so.

As a result the Archers have initiated High Court proceedings against Ms Madden seeking various orders and declarations including that the boundary fence is correctly positioned.

They also seek injunctions that the letter of the 21st September be withdrawn and that Ms Madden be restrained from any future interference with the Archer’s contractual relations.

They further seek damages for slander of their title.

The matter came before Mr Justice Michael Twomey, who on an ex-parte basis, granted the Archer’s lawyers permission to serve short notice of the proceedings on Ms Madden.

The Judge said he was not prepared to make any orders without first hearing from Ms Madden or her representatives.

The case will return before the courts next week.