Adverse Possession

Front 1

Purbick v Hackney London Borough

Back 1

Neureberger J summed up adverse possession in this case
'it is to some extent implicit in the present law of adverse possession, that an owner who makes no use of it, whatever should be expected to keep and eye on the property to ensure that advers possession rights are not being clocked up'

Front 2

Limitations

Back 2

Limitation Act (1980) s 15 (1) - Time limit of 12 years to recover land applies to both registered and unregistered. Amended by LRA 2002 s 96 (1) (2) no longer applies to registered land, basically abolishes AP on RL can apply after 10yrs

Front 3

Adverse possession rights - establish

Back 3

Factual possession
Intention to possess
Time
Possession must be exclusive, unbroken, exercised openly, without landowners permission.

Front 4

Buckinghamshire County Council v Moran (1988) 86
Successive owners fenced area next to garden - Moran had 'complete and exclusive physical control of the land. Chain of ownership had not been broken.

Back 4

" intention to own or even an intention to acquire ownership but an intention to possess" LGR 472, per Hoffman J, approved by House of Lords in J A Pye (Oxford) Ltd v Graham [2002] UKHL 30).
Slade LJ explained: "Possession is never 'adverse' within the meaning of the 1980 Act if it is enjoyed under a lawful title. If, therefore, a person occupies or uses land by licence of the owner with the paper title and his licence has not been duly determined, he cannot be treated as having been in 'adverse possession' as against the owner of the paper title."

Front 5

Powell v McFarlane (1979) 38 P & CR 452, 471472
grazing a cow, coupled with making hay and limited repairs to fencing did not suffice.There can be no adverse possession unless the trespasser also has an
intention to possess the land (animus possidendi).

Back 5

"the intention, in one's own name and on one's own behalf, to exclude the world at large, including the owner with the paper title if he be not himself the possessor, so far as reasonably practicable and so far as the processes of the law will allow" per Slade J

Front 6

A Pye (Oxford) Ltd v Graham [2002] UKHL 30).
Pye granted a licence to use field next to Graham's property - licence not renewed. Grahams there1986 -1997 registered a caution under AP rights. Held.

Back 6

Where the squatter has been able to establish factual possession, the intention to possess will frequently be deduced from the acts making up that factual possession.

Front 7

Explained in Powell v McFarlane:

Back 7

"In my judgement it is consistent with principle as well as authority that a person who originally entered another's land as a trespasser, but later seeks to show that he has dispossessed the owner, should be required to adduce compelling evidence that he had the requisite animus possidendi in any case where his use of the land was equivocal, in the sense that it did not necessarily, by itself, betoken an intention on his part to claim the land as his own and exclude the true owner."

Front 8

Adams v Trustees of Michael Batt Charitable Trust (2001) 82 P & CR 406

Back 8

Laddie J said:-
"Although I accept that the onus is on Mr Adams Snr to demonstrate that there was the necessary continuous period of adverse possession, this does not mean that he has to give a detailed day-to-day account ....The court must determine whether, upon a balance of probabilities, there was uninterrupted adverse possession throughout the relevant period."
In other words the continuity of possession is a matter of law based on the facts, and it is a balance of probabilities, that is, more likely than not.

Front 9

Prudential Assurance Co Ltd v Waterloo Real Estate Inc

Back 9

Peter Gibson LJ said that:-
"It would be plainly unjust for the paper owner to be deprived of his land where the claimant had not by his conduct made clear to the world including the paper owner, if present at the land, for the requisite period that he was intending to possess the land. The claimant must of course be shown to have the subjective intention to possess the land but he must also show by his outward conduct that that was his intention"

Front 10

9-04, Jourdan S, 2003,Adverse Possession, Butterworths, London, pp695 Possession contains an element of intention (animus possidendi), which distinguishes it from mere custody. Holding the property for his own benefit against the interests of another (the true owner).

Back 10

-Necessary intention;
-pre-existing rights on the land;
-the squatter who acts in accordance with the owner‟s requests;
-the effect of an oral acknowledgement of the owner‟s title;
-proving the necessary intention;
-relevance of the squatters subjective intention;
-relevance of the true owner‟s intention;
-where the squatter‟s use of the land is consistent with the paper owner‟s future plans for it.

Front 11

Adverse Possession in Registered Land

Back 11

After 10 years' adverse possession, the squatter will be entitled to apply to be registered as proprietor in place of the registered proprietor of the land. On such an application being made the registered proprietor (and certain other persons interested in the land) will be notified and given the opportunity to oppose the application. If the application is not opposed, the squatter will be registered as proprietor in place of the registered proprietor of the land. If the application is opposed, it will be rejected unless either: PE applies;adverse possession on adjacent land with reasonable belief he is true owner;boundary not determined; if application rejected - 2 years AP claimant can re apply and will be registered even if opposed.