(Antigua and Barbuda) The parties disputed a claim for land by adverse possession.
Held: Any acknowledgement of a paper title must be in writing. Lord Templeman explained the rule against reliance upon oral acknowledgements in adverse possession cases: ‘If an oral acknowledgment were allowed to constitute an interruption litigation would be encouraged and litigants would dispute what was said, by whom and to whom . . Once an acknowledgment has been reduced to writing, there is certainty about the words used and the court need only decide whether the words which have been written amount to an acknowledgment. There is no room for fraud, mistake or failure of memory. The written word speaks for itself.’
Lord Templeman, Lord Browne-Wilkinson, Lord Keith of Kinkel, Lord Goff, Sir Maurice Casey
[1991] WLR 1297, [1991] UKPC 33
Bailii
Limitation Act 1980 S1
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Mayor and Burgesses of London Borough of Lambeth v George Bigden and Others CA 1-Dec-2000
A block of flats had been occupied over several years by a succession of squatters. The present occupiers appealed an order for possession, and the authority appealed refusal of possession for other flats. The occupiers asserted possessory title. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 30 July 2021; Ref: scu.187455
