A 14-year legal battle between neighbors over a six-inch strip of land, an ornamental squirrel, and online songs has culminated in a £130,000 court bill for a couple in Essex.
Philip and Denise New have been ordered to pay the substantial sum after a dispute with their neighbors, Steve and Karen Gibson, over a shared fence. The case, which began in 2012, escalated to the High Court in London. The couple is now facing £120,000 in legal costs in addition to a £9,500 damages award.
The feud started when Philip New replaced fence panels along the boundary of their semi-detached properties. The Gibsons contended that the fence was improperly placed and encroached on their land. The News maintained that the fence had stood in the same location for over 15 years and that they had only replaced existing panels.
In 2015, the couples agreed to an independent surveyor to demarcate the boundary. However, the News disagreed with the surveyor's findings and sought a second opinion, leading to the Gibsons initiating legal action in 2018.
A judge ruled in favor of the Gibsons in 2021, upholding the boundary established by the initial surveyor. Subsequent appeals by the News were unsuccessful.
The dispute took a turn when Steve Gibson testified about two derogatory songs written and published by Philip New on Facebook and YouTube. The songs, discovered by the Gibsons' children in late 2020, contained lyrics that Judge Duddridge described as "unpleasant and personal." One song, titled 'Neighbours,' offered advice such as "Throw s*** at their windows, s*** at the door" and "p*** in their garden." Another song, 'Magic Garden,' alluded to benefit fraud by someone with a disability. Philip New claimed the songs were satirical and not intended to be about the Gibsons, but the judge rejected this, stating that posting them on public sites exposed the Gibsons to "ridicule, humiliation and embarrassment."
The Gibsons also claimed that Philip New removed a treasured ornamental squirrel from a post between the properties after the News lost an appeal. Mr. Gibson stated the squirrel had immense sentimental value, having been a gift from his in-laws, and that the post also served a practical purpose for securing a gate. Judge Duddridge dismissed the News' claim that the post was removed due to danger, expressing doubt that they genuinely believed it was theirs until after it was taken down.
While the judge acknowledged the land encroachment was minimal and did not prevent the Gibsons from using their garden, he stated they were "entitled to be compensated for the inconvenience and distress" caused by the ongoing trespass.
At the High Court, the News' barrister argued that the £9,500 damages award was excessive and would result in a "ruinous" legal bill. He also challenged the damages related to the squirrel post, asserting it was on the News' side of the surveyed boundary. The Gibsons' barrister countered that the damages were justified given the prolonged encroachment.
Mr. Justice Thompsell reserved judgment on the matter. Should the damages award be reduced to less than £3,000, it could significantly alter the responsibility for the substantial legal costs.