Couple who lost 14 year battle with neighbours over six inches of land and a 'sentimental' ornamental squirrel are left facing £130,000 court bill

By OLIVIA DAY, ASSISTANT NEWS EDITOR, AUSTRALIA Published: 12:37, 8 July 2026 | Updated: 12:47, 8 July 2026 A bitter 14-year feud over six inches of garden, an ornamental squirrel and demeaning YouTube songs has left a couple facing a £130,000 court bill. Philip New and his wife Denise have been forced to remortgage their home after becoming embroiled in a row with their neighbours Steve and Karen Gibson over a shared fence between their semi-detached properties in Essex.  The case reached the High Court in London last week after the News challenged a £9,500 damages award. The couple are also facing legal costs of £120,000. The dispute began in 2012 when Mr New replaced some old fence panels that had become overgrown with weeds.  The Gibsons argued the fence was in the wrong place and should be further into the News' garden, meaning the couple were trespassing on their land. The News say the fence has been in the same position for more than 15 years, claiming they merely replaced the panels using the original cement posts. The couples agreed to settle their differences outside court and engaged an independent surveyor to determine the boundary line in 2015. But the News disagreed with the surveyor's line and sought a second opinion, with the dispute escalating when the Gibsons sued in 2018. A bitter 14-year feud over six inches of garden, an ornamental squirrel and demeaning YouTube songs has left Philip and Denise New (pictured) facing a £130,000 court bill The Gibsons' ornamental squirrel on a post between the two houses is red-circled The two couples live in neighbouring semi-detached properties in Sunnymede Close, Thundersley, Essex, with their gardens now separated by parallel fences (pictured) In 2021, a judge ruled in favour of the Gibsons, declaring that the boundary line chosen by the first surveyor should be abided by.  After a series of unsuccessful appeals, the case went before Judge Duddridge in Southend County Court to decide how much compensation the Gibsons were owed after the News' fence encroached on their land. In his evidence, Mr Gibson, a builder with a rare bone disorder, said he was shocked to discover Mr New had written and published two derogatory songs about him on Facebook and YouTube. The songs were found by his children in late 2020. Lyrics in 'Neighbours' give advice about how to deal with bad neighbours. They include: 'Throw s*** at their windows, s*** at the door/ Call him a w*/call her a w*/p*** in their garden, till it's quite late/When they're asleep, blow up their gate'. 'The song 'Magic Garden' describes somebody who uses walking sticks and purports to be in pain when out in public, but throws their sticks away and is miraculously pain free when in their garden and is committing benefits fraud,' Judge Duddridge said. 'Mr Gibson described how upsetting, hurtful and hateful he found this song, which he thought was clearly about him, in view of his serious and rare disability and the difficulties he has had coming to terms with it.' Judge Duddridge rejected Mr New's claim that his 'tongue in cheek' songs were 'inspired' by his interactions with his neighbours, but not actually about them. 'Although I would not use the phrase 'tongue in cheek' to describe their unpleasant and personal content, I accept that Mr New intended them to be satirical and did not intend the advice in 'Neighbours' to be actually carried out,' he said.  Philip and Denise New are seen outside London's High Court last week The boundary line drawn up by a surveyor on Philip New's request, showing the tiny amount of land in dispute is pictured in this sketch The weeds and plants that Mr New had removed from the original fence in his garden 'I also accept that they were not sent directly to Mr and Mrs Gibson or intended for their consumption. However, he posted them on public social media sites and could have foreseen that they might come to their attention or be viewed by people who knew them, exposing them to ridicule, humiliation and embarrassment.  'As he ended up acknowledging, their content is offensive and defamatory. I accept that the claimants, in particular Mr Gibson, found the songs deeply hurtful and embarrassing given his rare condition, and that it aggravated the unpleasantness, emotional upset and mental health issues caused by this dispute.' Mr Gibson also claimed Mr New removed a decades-old ornamental squirrel from a post between the properties shortly after he and his wife lost an appeal, and removed the post using his hands and a mallet. The judge said: 'According to his statement, the squirrel post had been built by his parents in law, he had purchased the squirrel as a gift for Mrs Gibson and her parents during the 1980s and, for that reason, it had enormous sentimental value. 'He says that the gatepost had sentimental value, but was also of practical importance because they are no longer able to bolt their gate shut.' Judge Duddridge rejected Mr and Mrs New's claim that they removed the squirrel and post because it was dangerous. He said he was not convinced the News genuinely thought the post was theirs until after realising it was on their side.  He also rejected the Gibsons' claim that they had lost a substantial part of their garden due to the trespass, ruling that while it had prevented them fencing and landscaping as they wished, it had not deprived them of the use of a large area. Although the trespass by the News' fence was only by a 'matter of inches' and affected a 'trivial' amount of land, the Gibsons were 'entitled to be compensated for the inconvenience and distress' they were caused, Judge Duddridge said. A broken part of the original fence which runs behind Philip and Denise New's garden In London's High Court last week, the News' barrister, Paul Wilmshurst, said the £9,500 damages award exceeded the £3,000 settlement offer they made before trial, leaving his clients with a 'ruinous' legal costs bill. He argued damages relating to the removal of the squirrel post were also wrong, because it was on the News' side of the boundary as defined by the surveyor in 2015, and therefore belonged to them. The barrister urged Mr Justice Thompsell to overturn the damages award, saying the News had relinquished ownership of the 'trivial' land in 2021.   But the Gibsons' barrister, Rupert Myers, said the damages award was fully justified for the 'inconvenience and distress of nearly seven years of continuing encroachment' suffered by his clients.  Mr Justice Thompsell reserved his judgement until a later date. If Mr and Mrs New are successful and the damages award is reduced to less than £3,000, it could have a major impact on who pays the six-figure court bill.