1000 Cuts
A dated chronology of the Williams family's position at Great House Farm in law and in fact, 1870s to 1988, each step linked to its evidence.
Each entry gives a date, what happened, what it changed in law or in fact, and the evidence pages it rests on. "Depends on" and "Enabled" link each entry to the earlier entries it built on and the later ones that built on it. Open both ends of a link to check it.
Record = read in a court judgment, registry, archive, legislation or contemporaneous press. Family testimony = the family's own account. Not yet confirmed = no source located yet. Open question = what the record does not yet answer, and what would answer it. Grade = the evidence grade of the strongest item cited (1 record read in full; 2 record partly read or recited in a later record; 3 later official record or catalogue; 4 contemporaneous press; 5 family testimony; 6 research inference). Copies of one record count once (independent origin). Parcel A and Parcel B are provisional analytical polygons until the 1876–78 instruments and plans are overlaid.
1870s–1939: the family at Great House Farm
P11870s–1916Record
John Williams of the Great House, for many years a juror of the Llandough manor court, which met in his house. Bute’s own papers enter him as its tenant: a Feb 1916 yearly tenancy, recited in 1987 (deed and plan never produced), and the 1904 rent audit, "of Llandough Farm".
What changed: In Bute’s own papers, the occupation is a tenancy from the Bute estate: the 1904 rent audit EV-0227 and the Feb 1916 tenancy with plan EV-0014 both name John Williams as tenant; the c.1841 tithe lists him as occupier of 36 plots EV-0215.
Enabled: C01 Feb 1916 C06 c.1950–52
P2May 1897Not yet confirmed
Marconi's wireless tests at Lavernock and Flat Holm, close by. He stayed at the farm.
What changed: The 1897 press and the extracts of Kemp's diary record the tests at Lavernock and Flat Holm EV-0011 EV-0248 EV-0256; none of the extracts read so far names Great House Farm.
Open question: Did the Marconi team stay at the farm? The full Kemp diary (Bodleian MS. Marconi 89) or a letter placing the team there would answer it.
P31890s (year not yet found)Not yet confirmed
"Peerless" Jim Driscoll's first fight in the farm barn.
What changed: A local-history summary places the fight in the farm barn EV-0009; the year and the National Monuments Record citation have not been located.
Evidence: EV-0009
Open question: When was the fight, and what is the primary source? A dated report or the NMR entry would answer it.
P41891 to 1955Family testimony
Trees planted on the ground the family identifies as the house parcel (provisional Parcel A), in view of the town: one of the family's acts of occupation.
What changed: The family's account of tree planting on the ground it identifies as the provisional Parcel A, with an undated photograph EV-0009 EV-0199.
Open question: What did the planting cover, and when? Dated photographs, aerial images or survey sheets would answer it.
P51928Family testimony
Last rent for the house parcel paid in 1928, when the quarry machinery left; no rent for the house parcel after that.
What changed: The family's account EV-0016; no receipt for 1928 has been located. The Court of Appeal recorded rent arrears in the mid-1930s and late 1940s and a last payment, under a judgment for arrears, in 1953 EV-0080.
Evidence: EV-0016
Open question: Which is right for the house parcel: rent ending in 1928, or arrears and a 1953 payment? A rent book or the 1953 judgment file would answer it.
P61928 to 1949Family testimony
No one takes issue with the stopped rent for about twenty years, until the 1949 surrender and re-grant (family account).
P71939Record
The 1939 Western Ground Rents agreement plan highlights the fields (the provisional Parcel B); the house parcel is not shown on it. The plan fixes the extent of this letting, not what Western Ground Rents acquired in 1938.
What changed: The plan to the 1939 Western Ground Rents agreement highlights the fields (Parcel B) and does not show the house parcel EV-0023. Page 1 of the agreement is not yet held.
Evidence: EV-0023
Open question: What does page 1 of the 1939 agreement describe as let?
1916–1940
C01Feb 1916Record
A yearly agricultural tenancy from Bute to John Williams of "the whole of the farm", with plan, as recited by the Court of Appeal in 1987 (document and plan not held).
C0223–25 Dec 1938Record
Bute (Mountjoy) sells the reversion to Western Ground Rents Ltd, a ground-rent company; the conveyance later becomes the root of title.
What changed: The reversion passes from the Bute estate to Western Ground Rents Ltd EV-0019 EV-0022; this conveyance later serves as the root of title in the chain that leads to BP EV-0216.
Depends on: C01 Feb 1916
Enabled: C04 mid-1930s and late 1940s C10 1955 and 4 Jul 1955 C15 31 Dec 1969
Enabled: C04 mid-1930s and late 1940s C10 1955 and 4 Jul 1955 C15 31 Dec 1969
Open question: Was the farmhouse parcel inside the 1938 conveyance and plan? The conveyance and plan would answer it.
C031 Jul 1940Record
The Limitation Act 1939 comes into force: 12 years of adverse possession bars the paper owner (s.10 possession must be "adverse"; s.13 a formal entry alone keeps nothing alive).
What changed: From 1 July 1940, 12 years of adverse possession bars the paper owner's claim (s.10 requires the possession to be "adverse"; under s.13 a formal entry alone does not stop the clock). The 1987 judgment applies this Act to every later step EV-0080.
Evidence: EV-0080
1945–1954
C04mid-1930s and late 1940sRecord
The courts record John Williams as falling into rent arrears.
C052 Feb 1949Record
John Williams's tenancy is surrendered and a new yearly agricultural tenancy is granted to his son-in-law Frederick Buckler. It is never put in writing.
What changed: The tenancy passes from John Williams to Frederick Buckler as a new yearly tenancy, never put in writing EV-0025 EV-0080. The occupier is now a tenant of the 1949 grant.
Open question: Why was the 1949 re-grant made, and on whose initiative? Estate correspondence from 1948–49 would answer it.
C06c.1950–52Family testimony
Family title papers removed from the farmhouse blanket box.
What changed: The family's account: the title papers kept in the farmhouse blanket box were removed EV-0026. No court record mentions them.
Evidence: EV-0026
Depends on: P1 1870s–1916
Open question: What were the papers, and where are they now?
C071953Record
Frederick Buckler's last rent payment, made under a county-court judgment for arrears.
C081954Not yet confirmed
A step concerning Frederick Buckler's tenancy, listed in the family record.
What changed: The family record lists a 1954 step concerning Frederick Buckler's tenancy EV-0031; its source has not been located.
Evidence: EV-0031
Depends on: C05 2 Feb 1949
Open question: What happened in 1954? The source document would answer it.
1955–1965
C092 Feb 1955Record
A notice to quit ends Frederick Buckler's tenancy.
What changed: The tenancy ends; Frederick Buckler stays on without one. The Court of Appeal held that Frederick and Mary were in adverse possession of the house and garden from this date EV-0080.
Evidence: EV-0080
C101955 and 4 Jul 1955Record
Western Ground Rents obtains a summary possession order (Order 14) in the High Court and enforces it on 4 July 1955: all the farm is taken except the farmhouse and garden.
What changed: The High Court order is enforced on 4 July 1955 and every part of the farm except the farmhouse and garden is taken into possession EV-0032 EV-0034 EV-0080. The family records that Mary had just had a leg amputated and refused to leave EV-0034. The order itself is not yet located.
Depends on: C09 2 Feb 1955 C02 23–25 Dec 1938
Enabled: C11 1958 C12 1959 and Mar 1965 C16 16 Jun 1970
Enabled: C11 1958 C12 1959 and Mar 1965 C16 16 Jun 1970
Open question: What exactly did the 1955 order cover, and which ground was taken on 4 July 1955? The High Court order, warrant, execution return and plan would answer it. Whether that ground included the woodland and the green is a working hypothesis until they are read.
C111958Record (press)
Leckwith Common inquiry and Glamorgan County Council acquisitions near the farm; Mary's "Crichel Down" objection goes no further, and no petition is presented in Parliament.
What changed: Land near the farm passes into public schemes after the Leckwith Common inquiry EV-0035 EV-0036. Mary's "Crichel Down" objection is recorded EV-0037; no petition was presented in Parliament EV-0038.
Depends on: C10 1955 and 4 Jul 1955
Open question: What became of the 1958 objection? The inquiry file would answer it.
C121959 and Mar 1965Record
Western Ground Rents offers Mary a tenancy of the house and garden; she refuses. Alternative housing is offered and refused.
C1311 Dec 1962Record
Cardiff County Court possession order for the farmhouse and garden (Judge Temple Morris QC), with mesne profits; a suspended committal order against Frederick Buckler follows in June 1963.
What changed: A court orders possession of the farmhouse and garden EV-0041 EV-0030. The Court of Appeal held that this order stopped the 12-year period before it had run, so the paper owner's title was not extinguished (that court's view, 31 July 1987) EV-0080. The order was not enforced until leave was sought in 1974.
1966–1972
C141965–67Record
Frederick Buckler dies. Mary stays in the house.
What changed: Mary remains in the house, as she had through the 1959 and 1965 tenancy offers she refused, asserting title through her grandfather. The trial judge held that, while Frederick lived, only his intention counted EV-0080.
Evidence: EV-0080
C1531 Dec 1969Record
Western Ground Rents sells the farm, including the farmhouse, to BP Pension Trust.
What changed: The paper title, and as successor the benefit of the 1962 order, passes to BP Pension Trust EV-0043 EV-0080.
Depends on: C02 23–25 Dec 1938 C13 11 Dec 1962
Enabled: C17 1972 C18 3 Jul 1974 C19 17–19 Sep 1974 C22 23 May 1975
Enabled: C17 1972 C18 3 Jul 1974 C19 17–19 Sep 1974 C22 23 May 1975
C1616 Jun 1970Record
Village green VG41 registered by Glamorgan County Council.
What changed: A village green, VG41, is registered by the county council EV-0044. The certified map shows a small roadside wedge EV-0263.
Open question: Does VG41 overlap the house parcel, and who applied, under which section, with what ownership entry? The VG41 file (application, map, ownership section) and an overlay of the certified map on the 1916 plan would answer it. A green rests on 20 years' use as of right, not on 12 years' possession.
C171972Record
Outline planning permission for about 13 houses, with an ownership certificate.
What changed: Outline permission for about 13 houses is granted on an application carrying an ownership certificate EV-0046. The site is now on the planning register as a development site.
Evidence: EV-0046
Depends on: C15 31 Dec 1969
Open question: Who signed the 1972 ownership certificate, and was the occupier notified? The planning file would answer it.
1974
C183 Jul 1974Record
BP Pension Trust's new possession action: Mary pleads that BP's claim is barred by adverse possession under the 1939 Act. The action is adjourned part-heard and "has never been finally heard".
What changed: Mary pleads that BP's claim is barred by adverse possession under the 1939 Act. The action is adjourned part-heard and, in the Court of Appeal's words, "has never been finally heard" EV-0049 EV-0080. No decision on that plea is on the record.
Open question: What does the 1974 court file show was pleaded and left undecided? The HMCTS reply due 2 Nov 2026 would answer it.
C1917–19 Sep 1974Record
BP Pension Trust gets leave to execute the 1962 order (Judge Watkin Powell); the warrant may be enforced from 31 Oct 1974. She appeals, saying she had too little notice to be heard.
C2031 Oct 1974Record
Two letters, from BP Pension Trust and BP Properties, sent to her solicitor, allow her to stay rent-free for life: "no proceedings will be commenced until you personally no longer live there".
C21Nov–Dec 1974Record
On her solicitors' advice she does nothing while the 12 years from the 1962 order run out, and does not reject the letters.
What changed: The Court of Appeal recorded that she did not reject the letters: "she did not, however, do that" EV-0080 EV-0050. The court treated that as accepting the licence.
Open question: Did Mary or her solicitors write after 31 Oct 1974 rejecting the licence? Such a letter would meet the point the Court of Appeal identified.
1975
C2223 May 1975Record
BP Pension Trust conveys the farmhouse plot and other land to BP Properties, reserving 80-year road and sewer rights "to serve any development".
What changed: The farmhouse plot passes from BP Pension Trust to BP Properties, with 80-year road and sewer rights reserved "to serve any development" EV-0052.
Evidence: EV-0052
Depends on: C20 31 Oct 1974 C15 31 Dec 1969
Enabled: C24 19 and 30 Nov 1982 C25 23 Feb 1983 C29 May 1984
Enabled: C24 19 and 30 Nov 1982 C25 23 Feb 1983 C29 May 1984
C231 Dec 1975Record
The Vale of Glamorgan becomes a compulsory registration area.
What changed: First registration becomes compulsory on sale in the Vale of Glamorgan EV-0265.
Evidence: EV-0265
Enabled: C24 19 and 30 Nov 1982 C25 23 Feb 1983
1982–1983
C2419 and 30 Nov 1982Record
The fields (the provisional Parcel B) pass between BP companies and are registered (WA231076), as the law required within two months.
C2523 Feb 1983Record
BP Properties applies to register the farmhouse (Form 1C, WA240304) while Mary is alive.
What changed: BP Properties applies to register the farmhouse, WA240304, on Form 1C, while Mary is alive and living there EV-0066 EV-0063. The form requires the applicant to state that it is in possession EV-0065.
Depends on: C20 31 Oct 1974 C22 23 May 1975 C23 1 Dec 1975 C24 19 and 30 Nov 1982
Enabled: C27 8 Apr – 12 May 1983
Enabled: C27 8 Apr – 12 May 1983
Open question: What did BP state about possession and the occupier, and did the Registry raise requisitions or serve notice? The complete first-registration files for WA231076 and WA240304 (applications, abstracts, requisitions, replies, notices) would answer it.
C2626 Mar 1983Record
Mary Williams (Mrs Buckler) dies, after an illness in the weeks before (family testimony).
C278 Apr – 12 May 1983Record
The Registry examines the farmhouse application after her death: Linklaters letter of 8 Apr (form D23), correspondence of 12 Apr and letters of 12 May 1983.
What changed: The Registry examines the application after her death: Linklaters' letter of 8 Apr (form D23), correspondence of 12 Apr and letters of 12 May 1983 EV-0069 EV-0070 EV-0071. The title takes effect from the application date.
Open question: What did the 1983 letters tell the Registry about who lived in the house? The Registry copy file, due 28 Oct 2026, would answer it.
C2826 Jul 1983 (in force 1 Sep 1983)Record
The Commons Registration (Glamorgan) Act 1983 validates the Glamorgan common-land registers.
What changed: Parliament validates the Glamorgan common-land registers EV-0232. The Act covers common land; VG41 is a village-green registration EV-0044. No direct effect on the farmhouse has been found.
Depends on: C16 16 Jun 1970
Open question: Which 1983 step is meant here? If it is the farmhouse registration, see C25 and C27.
1984–1987
C29May 1984Record
BP Properties issues a writ for possession against her son, the occupier.
C3010–24 Jul 1986Record
High Court trial in Cardiff; Hollis J gives judgment for BP.
C312 Feb 1987Record
The farmhouse title is merged into the farm title (application, WA231076 item 14) while the appeal is pending.
What changed: The farmhouse title is merged into the farm title, WA231076 item 14, while the appeal is pending EV-0078.
Evidence: EV-0078
Depends on: C27 8 Apr – 12 May 1983 C24 19 and 30 Nov 1982 C30 10–24 Jul 1986
Enabled: C36 9 Jul 1988
Enabled: C36 9 Jul 1988
Open question: Did the amalgamation change the extent, class of title, parties' rights or the issues on appeal? What class of title was granted in 1983 (if possessory, the rules from 1 Jan 1987 on upgrading during an open adverse claim would apply)? The application, plan and the register editions before and after would answer it.
C3231 Jul 1987Record
Court of Appeal: BP Properties Ltd v Buckler [1987] EWCA Civ 2 dismisses the appeal. Possession in six weeks; leave to appeal to the House of Lords refused.
What changed: The appeal is dismissed; possession in six weeks; leave to appeal to the House of Lords refused EV-0080. The court accepted adverse possession by Frederick and Mary from 1955 and held that the 1962 order and the 1974 letters defeated it.
Evidence: EV-0080
1988
C331987–88Record
Petition for leave to appeal to the House of Lords.
What changed: A petition for leave to appeal to the House of Lords is lodged EV-0076. The outcome papers are not yet held.
Evidence: EV-0076
Open question: What became of the petition? The House of Lords Journal would answer it.
C343 May 1988Record
Application to the European Commission of Human Rights (14464/88), later declared inadmissible.
What changed: Application 14464/88 to the European Commission of Human Rights is declared inadmissible, so there is no hearing on the merits EV-0122.
Evidence: EV-0122
Depends on: C32 31 Jul 1987 C33 1987–88
C35Apr–May 1988Record (press)
First eviction attempt; BP's spokesman explains the case to the press.
C369 Jul 1988Record (press)
Estates Gazette: "BP signal Welsh sales".
What changed: The Estates Gazette reports BP planning sales in Wales EV-0093. No record yet ties the 1982–83 filings to a sale.
Evidence: EV-0093
Open question: Was the farm part of the 1988 sale? Sale particulars or the Land Registry history would answer it.
C3729 Jul – Dec 1988Record
Cadw inspects and photographs the house; the listing decision comes in December 1988.
What changed: Cadw inspects and photographs the house in July 1988 EV-0094 EV-0095 EV-0096; the listing decision is dated December 1988 EV-0103.
Open question: When did Cadw's decision reach BP and the council? The listing file would answer it.
C3830 Nov – 3 Dec 1988Record (press)
Forced entry and the outbuilding roof removed; the residents are evicted; Mr Buckler is taken from a hospital bed to face an assault charge.
What changed: Forced entry, the outbuilding roof removed and the residents evicted EV-0098 EV-0099 EV-0101; Mr Buckler is taken from a hospital bed to face an assault charge EV-0102.
Open question: What became of the assault charge? The magistrates' record would answer it.
C396 Dec 1988Record (press)
The final eviction hearing in the Cardiff High Court fails.
C406–7 Dec 1988Record (press, SMR)
The farmhouse is demolished ("Tears flow as 800 year-old farm house is razed at last").
What changed: The farmhouse is demolished EV-0106 EV-0107. The Sites and Monuments Record later enters "building destroyed by owners" EV-0108. Sources give 6 December and 7 December.
Open question: Was the farmhouse demolished on 6 or 7 December 1988? The demolition contractor's record, the planning file or a dated photograph would answer it.
After 7 December 1988
- 11 Feb 1989: Vale councillors authorise legal action against BP Properties over the demolition. EV-0117
- Mar 1989: Sites and Monuments Record PRN 02038s: "building destroyed by owners". EV-0118
- 13 Mar 1990: Outline planning permission for houses at Great House Farm (89/01396/OUT). EV-0124 EV-0114
- 1992–94: Reserved matters approved and 20 houses built. EV-0127 EV-0129 EV-0133
What the record shows was decided
- Jul 1955: possession of the whole farm except the farmhouse and garden, under a High Court order EV-0080 (the order itself is not yet located). See C10.
- 11 Dec 1962: possession of the farmhouse and garden, Cardiff County Court EV-0041. See C13.
- Sep 1974: leave to execute the 1962 order EV-0041. See C19.
- Jul 1986: judgment for BP; Frederick's possession not adverse; Mary a licensee from the 31 Oct 1974 letters EV-0074 EV-0075. See C30.
- 31 Jul 1987: appeal dismissed; the 1962 order stopped the clock before 12 years; from the 1974 letters possession was no longer adverse; adverse possession from 1955 accepted; leave to appeal to the House of Lords refused EV-0080. See C32.
- 1988: the human-rights application declared inadmissible EV-0122, and the final eviction hearing of 6 Dec 1988 failed EV-0104. See C34 and C39.
What was never decided
- The 3 Jul 1974 plea that BP's claim was barred by adverse possession: adjourned part-heard and, in the Court of Appeal's words, "has never been finally heard" EV-0049 EV-0080. See C18.
- No court decision on the record determines who owned the farmhouse as a question of title; the 1986 and 1987 judgments decided possession and limitation EV-0075 EV-0080.
- No record of compensation for the demolition, and no finding against any party for it, has been located. The outcome of the Vale councillors' 1989 decision to take legal action EV-0117 is not yet located.
- The House of Lords outcome papers are not yet held EV-0076. See C33.
What the courts found against the family
- The Court of Appeal held that the 1962 order stopped the 12-year period before it ran, and that from the 1974 letters Mary's possession was no longer adverse EV-0080. These holdings stand unless set aside.
- The judgment records rent arrears in the 1930s and 1940s and a last payment in 1953 EV-0080, against the family's account of rent ending in 1928 EV-0016.
- The trial judge found that Frederick had no intention to possess as owner, relying on the March 1965 offer EV-0080. See C12.
- BP did not depend on the 1983 registration to sue: the 1984 action succeeded on the 1974 letters EV-0073 EV-0080.
- No record yet shows BP knew of Mary's final illness, or that the 1983 filing was timed to it.
Open questions
- What does the 1974 Cardiff County Court file show was pleaded and left undecided? The HMCTS reply due 2 Nov 2026 would show it EV-0049.
- What did BP and its solicitors tell the Land Registry in 1983 about who lived in the house? The application papers and the 8 Apr, 12 Apr and 12 May 1983 letters (Registry reply due 28 Oct 2026) would show it EV-0069 EV-0070.
- Did Mary or her solicitors reject the licence after 31 Oct 1974 in writing? A letter doing so would meet the point the Court of Appeal identified EV-0080.
- Was the farmhouse parcel inside the 1938 Bute–Western Ground Rents conveyance and plan EV-0019 EV-0023?
- Each "Open question" line in the entries above is a further ingredient still missing.
Competing theories, most plausible first
Competing theories that could account for the entries above, ordered from most to least plausible given all the evidence held today: how much of the record each accounts for, and how much stands against it. Each is a theory, not a finding. The courts' view is included and ranked like the others. Below the ranked theories, four broader explanations (H1–H4) and "insufficient evidence" are set out with the record each would need.
T1Theory 1 of 5
The courts' view: possession was lawfully recovered and the paper title was never extinguished. The family held as tenants until the 1955 notice to quit, then as adverse possessors; the 1962 order stopped the 12-year period before it ran, and the 31 Oct 1974 letters made Mary's later possession a licence, so the paper title running from Bute through the 1938 conveyance to BP was never extinguished and possession was recovered lawfully.
Evidence for: The 1916 tenancy of "the whole of the farm" EV-0014; the 1953 rent payment under a judgment EV-0080; the 1962 possession order EV-0041; the 1974 letters EV-0050; the High Court judgment EV-0075 and the Court of Appeal EV-0080. These holdings bind unless set aside.
Evidence against: The 1974 adverse-possession plea "has never been finally heard" EV-0049; the family's account of rent ending in 1928 EV-0016; the 1939 plan shows only the fields EV-0023; whether the 1938 conveyance included the farmhouse parcel has not been read EV-0019.
Would be confirmed or refuted by: Confirmed by a 1938 conveyance plan that includes the farmhouse parcel and by the absence of any written rejection of the 1974 licence. Refuted by a plan that leaves the farmhouse out, or a letter rejecting the licence after 31 Oct 1974.
T2Theory 2 of 5
Lawful steps, sequenced against the limitation clock. Each step was lawful on its own, but together they kept the family's possession from ever running its 12 years, without the ownership plea being decided: the 1962 order, its revival about 12 weeks before the period from it ended, the licence letters, and the 1983 registration while Mary was alive.
Evidence for: Leave to execute in Sep 1974 against an 11 Dec 1974 expiry EV-0041 EV-0080; the letters of 31 Oct 1974 EV-0050; the undecided 1974 plea EV-0049; the 1983 application made in her lifetime EV-0066; BP's spokesman in 1988 on waiting until her death EV-0088.
Evidence against: Waiting for her death is also what the 1974 letters promised EV-0050; the 1982 field registration was compulsory EV-0265; BP's 1984 action succeeded on the 1974 letters, not on the 1983 registration EV-0080; no record yet shows BP knew of her final illness. Other intervals in the record do not fit a 12-year pattern (8 years 4 months from the 1974 letters to the 1983 application), and the steps differ in kind (an order, letters, a registration).
T3Theory 3 of 5
The 1983 registration misdescribed the occupation. BP's 1983 application for the farmhouse, made while Mary lived there and examined after her death, did not tell the Registry the true position of the occupier.
Evidence for: The application date and her death in the weeks after it EV-0066 EV-0067; the 8 Apr, 12 Apr and 12 May 1983 letters exist EV-0069 EV-0070 EV-0071; the house title was merged into the farm title while the appeal was pending EV-0078.
Evidence against: What the letters say is not yet known; registration times in 1982–83 were ordinary; the 1984 action did not depend on the registration EV-0080.
Would be confirmed or refuted by: Confirmed or refuted by the Land Registry's 1983 application papers and letters (reply due 28 Oct 2026).
T4Theory 4 of 5
The farmhouse parcel stood outside the paper chain. Parcel A, the house parcel (a provisional analytical polygon), was never conveyed in the Bute → Western Ground Rents chain, so the possession cases started from a paper title that did not cover the house.
Evidence for: The 1939 agreement plan highlights the fields only EV-0023; the family's account of the house standing apart EV-0016; the separate 1983 registration of the farmhouse EV-0066.
Evidence against: The 1916 tenancy covers "the whole of the farm" with plan EV-0014; the courts took the paper title to the farm as their starting point EV-0080; the 1938 conveyance and its plan have not yet been read EV-0019.
Would be confirmed or refuted by: Settled either way by the 1938 Bute–Western Ground Rents conveyance and plan, and the 1905 Bute conveyance.
T5Theory 5 of 5
A 1988 sale drove the clearance. The site had become an asset for sale in 1988, and the clearance served that sale.
Evidence for: "BP signal Welsh sales", Estates Gazette, 9 Jul 1988 EV-0093; the 1975 deed reserved road and sewer rights "to serve any development" EV-0052; houses followed from 1990 EV-0124.
Evidence against: No record ties the farm to the 1988 sale; the land was still being sold off by BP Properties in 1989 and 1993; the 1986 charge to Intercontinental was over a London office, not Llandough.
Would be confirmed or refuted by: Sale particulars for 1988–93, or the Land Registry history of WA231076.
Four broader explanations, and the fifth answer
An outside forensic review (25 Oct 2026) frames four broader explanations. Each is set beside the ranked theories above and the records it would need. None is a finding; "insufficient evidence" is a legitimate answer for each.
H4Viable
Lawful possession and redevelopment, with ordinary errors and record loss.
Beside the ranked theories: Theory 1 (the courts' view); parts of Theory 2 (each step lawful)
Evidence for: The 1962 order, the 1974 letters and the 1986–87 judgments EV-0041 EV-0050 EV-0075 EV-0080; the European Commission of Human Rights decision of 14 Apr 1989 (application 14464/88; evidence page to be added) found the interference with the home justified and the application inadmissible.
Evidence against: The 1974 plea "has never been finally heard" EV-0049; the 1938 conveyance and plan have not been read EV-0019; the 1983 application papers are not yet held EV-0066.
Would be confirmed or refuted by: Confirmed by a 1938 plan that includes the farmhouse parcel and first-registration files that record the occupier. Weakened by either showing the opposite.
H2Open; the best-documented line of enquiry
Planning and archaeology steps fell short of the advice given, without any title scheme.
Beside the ranked theories: No ranked title theory; a separate line from 1989
Evidence for: Outline permission 89/01396/OUT (13 Mar 1990) with archaeology conditions; the archaeologists' letter of 27 Jul 1992 and reserved-matters approval 92/00671/RES on 3 Sep 1992; the archaeologists' letter of 13 and 15 Dec 1993 that condition 18 "has not been fulfilled" with a recommended breach notice; the 1994 excavation of 1,026 burials (858 inhumations in the HER event record) [EV-0900] [EV-0126] [EV-0131].
Evidence against: The developer's counsel's opinion of 4 Feb 1994 that condition 18 "has been discharged" [EV-0900]; outline conditions still applied in 1992, so no new condition was needed; the full condition-18 discharge file is not yet read.
Would be confirmed or refuted by: The complete 1989–94 planning and condition-18 discharge files, the 1990 field archive and the officer and committee records.
H1Insufficient evidence
A coordinated scheme against Mary (Nancy) Williams, with public bodies taking part.
Beside the ranked theories: Theory 2 only if intent and coordination were shown; Theory 3 only if the misdescription was knowing
Evidence for: Timing: leave to enforce in Sep 1974 before the 11 Dec 1974 expiry EV-0041; the 1983 application in her lifetime EV-0066; the 1987 amalgamation during the appeal EV-0078.
Evidence against: No record read shows an agreement, coordinated acts or an official knowingly assisting; the letters promised what BP then did EV-0050; the 1984 action rested on the 1974 letters, not the 1983 registration EV-0080.
Would be confirmed or refuted by: Correspondence between the parties, the 1974 county-court file, and the first-registration files with requisitions and replies.
H3Insufficient evidence
Both: a title scheme and planning shortfalls, causally linked.
Beside the ranked theories: Theory 5 (sale drove the clearance), in part
Evidence for: The 1975 conveyance reserved road and sewer rights "to serve any development" EV-0052; houses followed from 1990 EV-0124.
Evidence against: No record yet ties the title steps to the planning decisions; the farm title did not pass in the 1988 sale (BP Properties was still transferor in 1989 and 1993) EV-0093.
Would be confirmed or refuted by: BP and developer files linking the 1983–87 title steps to the 1989–94 planning steps.
—The present position for H1 and H3
Insufficient evidence to choose.
Beside the ranked theories: Every theory while the decisive records are outstanding
Evidence for: The decisive deeds, orders, plans and registration files listed under "Records that would settle it" are not yet read.
Would be confirmed or refuted by: Each record on that list.
Records that would settle it
The records the chronology still needs, in order of how much each could change the picture. For each: who holds it, what it would test, and where the request stands. "Not produced" is never read as "destroyed", and "destroyed under a schedule" is never read as "concealed".
R1Family papers
1938 Bute/Mountjoy → Western Ground Rents conveyance, schedule and plan
Held by: Family-held (wiki register, EV-0019); copies "filed under WA231076" at HM Land Registry
Would test: What WGR acquired; whether the farmhouse parcel was inside the root conveyance (Theories 1 and 4)
Evidence: EV-0019
R2Requested
Complete first-registration files WA231076 (Nov 1982) and WA240304 (Feb 1983): applications, abstracts, certificates, requisitions, replies, occupation enquiries, notices; 1987 amalgamation application and plan
Held by: HM Land Registry (Wales Office)
Would test: Whether the occupier and the unheard 1974 plea were declared; class of title; effect of the 1987 amalgamation (Theory 3, H1)
R3Requested
1974 Cardiff County Court possession action file (plaint, defence, adjournment 3 Jul 1974), leave application of 17–19 Sep 1974, warrant and withdrawal; 1962 pleadings, order and plan
Held by: HMCTS Cardiff (county court records); Glamorgan Archives / TNA if transferred
Would test: What was pleaded and never heard; what the 1962 order covered (Theories 1 and 2)
R4Requested
1876–78 Bute / Daniel Thomas / Williams instruments and plans (incl. the lease of 6 Nov 1877)
Held by: National Library of Wales (Bute estate papers), Glamorgan Archives (Bute/Mountjoy), Cardiff Central Library (Bute X.6(12))
Would test: Whether a separate house/quarry parcel existed and on what terms (all Parcel A/B material)
Evidence: EV-0006
R5Not yet requested
1955 High Court Order 14 possession order, writ/warrant of possession, execution return and plan (4 Jul 1955)
Held by: The National Archives (J-series High Court records) / HMCTS; Glamorgan Archives (sheriff or under-sheriff records)
Would test: Exact ground taken on 4 Jul 1955; whether woodland and green were included (cut C10)
R6Requested
1961 WGR / South Western Brick & Tile / Cardiff City Corporation deed and plan; complete VG41 village-green file (application, map, ownership section, objection 314)
Held by: HM Land Registry (copy filed under WA231076); Cardiff Council (deed); Vale of Glamorgan Council as commons registration authority; Glamorgan Archives
Would test: Terms and extent of the 1961 deed; who applied for VG41 and on what basis
R7Requested
1969 WGR → BP Pension Trust conveyance and plan; 1975 BP Pension Trust → BP Properties conveyance (coloured plans); 1982 intra-group conveyance
Held by: HM Land Registry (filed copies); BP (legal / archive)
Would test: The documentary root BP used and what land it covered
R8Requested
Complete 1989–90 outline planning file 89/01396/OUT: Appendices B–E, consultee responses (incl. Cardiff Bay Development Corporation), committee report, conditions
Held by: Vale of Glamorgan Council (planning / FOI unit)
Would test: What was known and advised before outline consent (H2)
Evidence: EV-0900 EV-0126
R9Requested
Condition 18 discharge file 1992–94: second page of the archaeologists' letter of 27 Jul 1992, officer authorisation and delegation for 92/00671/RES, enforcement decision after the Dec 1993 breach advice, developer's counsel's opinion (4 Feb 1994)
Held by: Vale of Glamorgan Council; Persimmon Homes (successor to Ideal Homes); Heneb (formerly GGAT)
Would test: Whether condition 18 was discharged or enforced, and who decided (H2)
Evidence: EV-0131 EV-0900
R10Requested
Cadw listing and spot-listing file for 1988 (assessment, decision of 5 Dec 1988, correspondence) and the retention / destruction schedule that applied
Held by: Welsh Government / Cadw; RCAHMW
Would test: What was known, who declined listing and why; whether loss of the file followed a schedule (audit #14)
Evidence: EV-0244
R11Not yet requested
GGAT 1990 field archive: trench logs, field sheets, photographs, inaccessible-area map, basis for the "low potential" zoning
Held by: Heneb (formerly GGAT); RCAHMW (NMR archive deposit)
Would test: Whether the eastern ground was investigated before it was zoned low potential (H2)
Evidence: EV-0126
R12Requested
1993 BP Properties → Ideal Homes transfer and plan; 1994 Ideal Homes → Forest of Cardiff transfer and plan
Held by: HM Land Registry (official copies); Persimmon; Cardiff Council / Forest of Cardiff
Would test: Extent and relationship to the woodland title WA735527
Evidence: EV-0136 EV-0169
R13Requested
Land Authority for Wales board papers and Nov 1988 sale schedules
Held by: The National Archives; Welsh Government (successor)
Would test: Whether Great House Farm was included in, or excluded from, the 1988 sales (Theory 5)
Evidence: EV-0093 EV-0270
R14Requested
1916 Bute–John Williams tenancy and plan; 15 May 1924 Bute–Corbett drain agreement and plan; 1925–28 quarry completion papers
Held by: Glamorgan Archives (Bute estate, DSA/12/4232, DSA/12/4888); NLW
Would test: Test the 1928 transition and the extent of the 1916 letting
R15Requested
1986 High Court trial bundle and judgment; 1987–88 appeal and House of Lords leave papers
Held by: TNA (J-series); Linklaters (BP's solicitors); appellant's solicitors' successors
Would test: What title evidence was produced and decided
R16Not yet requested
Probate of John Williams (d. 17 Jul 1908) and of John Williams (the son)
Held by: HM Courts & Tribunals Service probate records (public index)
Would test: Family succession; any devise of land
Evidence: EV-0243
R17Not yet requested
European Commission of Human Rights decision 14464/88 (14 Apr 1989), full text
Held by: Council of Europe HUDOC (public)
Would test: Adds the decision as its own evidence page; the case file itself was destroyed in 2000
R18Requested
Press page images for 1938, 1955, 1958, 1974 and 1988–89 items now held as OCR text
Held by: Newspaper archives and syndication desks
Would test: Replace OCR snippets with page images
Version 2.2.0, 2026-10-25. Each entry is one row in the catalogue database, with its evidence links and cross-links. Back to top