Adverse Possession.
Adverse Possession is a legal term used to describe a claim to title to land founded on
possession where Legal rights are acqu ired informally through independent
acquisition
If a C uses land, or exercises a right with the characteristics of an easement over land,
for a period of time, then he or she may obtain legal title, or a legal easement by virt ue
of that use Adverse possession and squatting are not synonymous
The law on adverse possession appears to have favoured the rights of the possessors rather than the rights of the paper owners
Adverse possession can be seen as encouraging productive land use Original (paper title owner) loses ownership by legitimate means
REGIS TERED LAND: initially 10 years (it was 12 befor e the LRA2002 came in to force – so
bear this in mind f or PQs)
UNREGIS TERED LAND : 12 year s s.15(1) Lim itation Act 198 0
When does time st art to run?
Paper title owner no longer using land - Dispossessed or discontinued use AND some
other person takes “adverse possession” of the land.
(Rains v Buxton) no need for the paper owner to know that the AP has taken
possession for time to be counted. REQUIR EMENTS
2 Elements
Lord Browne-W ilkinson in : There are two elements necessary Pye v Graham
for legal possession
o(1) a suffic ient degree of physical custody and control (factual possession)
o(2) an intention to exercise such custody and control on one’s own behalf and
for one’ s own benefit (intention to possess)
third r equirem ent - AND possession must be “ adver se” – wi thout consen t.
Factual Possession
Definition:
Slade J in (accepted in ) Powell v McFarlane Pye v Graham
oFactual possession signifies an appropriate degree of physical control
oEverything must depend on the particular circumstances, but broadly , what
must be shown … is that the alleged possessor has been dealing with the land
… as an occupying owner might have been expected to deal with it and that
no-one else has done so. Enclosure & Ex clusion
Pye v Graham - Graham farmed land, grazed cattle, maintained the boundary ,
trimmed the hedges and re-seeded the land. The paper owner had no key to the gate
to the land. His physical exclusion meant that Graham had F ACTUAL POSSESSION.
Williams v Usherwood – land enclosed by a fence, three cars were parked on paved driveway . FACTUAL POSSESSION.
Ramriio (Sampson) v Ishmael and heerasingh - Part of the building was capable of being possessed by the C to the exclusion of others. F ACTUAL POSSESSION.
Changing/ adding locks is good evidence
Lambeth LBC v Blackburn adverse possession of house, squatter changed lock and he
was the only one who had a key
Buckinghamshire CC v Moran
Trivial acts will not be sufficient
Tecbild v Chamerlain – children playing on the land and tethering ponies did not constitute factual possession. NO F ACTUAL POSSESSION.
Inglewood v Baker the occasional clearance of rubbish and shooting foxes and rabbits
was not enough to constitute factual possession. Boosey v Davis a flimsy fence was found not to constitute enough for possession in fact, they occasional grazed sheep on the land. “minimal in quality and quantity” not enough. Numerous diffe rent activities of the possessor should be considered together
Smith v W aterm an – lots of different small act s that wouldn’t be considered on t heir own, may be considered if they are accumulated together . Intention to possess
Definition:
Slade J in (accepted in ) Powell v McFarlane Pye v Graham
oan intention to possess involves the , in one’ s own name and on one’ s intention
own behalf, to , including the owner with the paper exclude the world at large
title…so far as is reasonable practicable and so far as the processes of the law will allow oWhat is required is not an intention to own or even an intention to acquire ownership but an intention to possess Buckinghamshire county council v Moran
oThe possessor does not have to prove that he thought the land was his, he just has to have intended to EXCLUDE the world at lar ge, including the paper owner . Littledale v Liverpool
Adverse Possession is a legal term used to describe a claim to title to land founded on
possession where Legal rights are acqu ired informally through independent
acquisition
If a C uses land, or exercises a right with the characteristics of an easement over land,
for a period of time, then he or she may obtain legal title, or a legal easement by virt ue
of that use Adverse possession and squatting are not synonymous
The law on adverse possession appears to have favoured the rights of the possessors rather than the rights of the paper owners
Adverse possession can be seen as encouraging productive land use Original (paper title owner) loses ownership by legitimate means
REGIS TERED LAND: initially 10 years (it was 12 befor e the LRA2002 came in to force – so
bear this in mind f or PQs)
UNREGIS TERED LAND : 12 year s s.15(1) Lim itation Act 198 0
When does time st art to run?
Paper title owner no longer using land - Dispossessed or discontinued use AND some
other person takes “adverse possession” of the land.
(Rains v Buxton) no need for the paper owner to know that the AP has taken
possession for time to be counted. REQUIR EMENTS
2 Elements
Lord Browne-W ilkinson in : There are two elements necessary Pye v Graham
for legal possession
o(1) a suffic ient degree of physical custody and control (factual possession)
o(2) an intention to exercise such custody and control on one’s own behalf and
for one’ s own benefit (intention to possess)
third r equirem ent - AND possession must be “ adver se” – wi thout consen t.
Factual Possession
Definition:
Slade J in (accepted in ) Powell v McFarlane Pye v Graham
oFactual possession signifies an appropriate degree of physical control
oEverything must depend on the particular circumstances, but broadly , what
must be shown … is that the alleged possessor has been dealing with the land
… as an occupying owner might have been expected to deal with it and that
no-one else has done so. Enclosure & Ex clusion
Pye v Graham - Graham farmed land, grazed cattle, maintained the boundary ,
trimmed the hedges and re-seeded the land. The paper owner had no key to the gate
to the land. His physical exclusion meant that Graham had F ACTUAL POSSESSION.
Williams v Usherwood – land enclosed by a fence, three cars were parked on paved driveway . FACTUAL POSSESSION.
Ramriio (Sampson) v Ishmael and heerasingh - Part of the building was capable of being possessed by the C to the exclusion of others. F ACTUAL POSSESSION.
Changing/ adding locks is good evidence
Lambeth LBC v Blackburn adverse possession of house, squatter changed lock and he
was the only one who had a key
Buckinghamshire CC v Moran
Trivial acts will not be sufficient
Tecbild v Chamerlain – children playing on the land and tethering ponies did not constitute factual possession. NO F ACTUAL POSSESSION.
Inglewood v Baker the occasional clearance of rubbish and shooting foxes and rabbits
was not enough to constitute factual possession. Boosey v Davis a flimsy fence was found not to constitute enough for possession in fact, they occasional grazed sheep on the land. “minimal in quality and quantity” not enough. Numerous diffe rent activities of the possessor should be considered together
Smith v W aterm an – lots of different small act s that wouldn’t be considered on t heir own, may be considered if they are accumulated together . Intention to possess
Definition:
Slade J in (accepted in ) Powell v McFarlane Pye v Graham
oan intention to possess involves the , in one’ s own name and on one’ s intention
own behalf, to , including the owner with the paper exclude the world at large
title…so far as is reasonable practicable and so far as the processes of the law will allow oWhat is required is not an intention to own or even an intention to acquire ownership but an intention to possess Buckinghamshire county council v Moran
oThe possessor does not have to prove that he thought the land was his, he just has to have intended to EXCLUDE the world at lar ge, including the paper owner . Littledale v Liverpool
