(Hong Kong) Various provisions had been made for the termination of long leases in Hong Kong. Land had come to be occupied by adverse possession. At first instance the judge had given judgment against the squatters, but then retracted after a later court of appeal decision. The Court of Appeal re-instated the first order.
Held: The squatter against a leasehold title could acquire only a title equivalent to that of the leasehold interest. When a squatter on land held under a renewable lease is sued and pleads a limitation defence, the lessee is unable to respond by relying upon the (deemed) new lease as a new title setting time running afresh.
Judges:
Lord Keith of Kinkel Lord Jauncey of Tullichettle Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead Lord Steyn Sir Christopher Slade
Citations:
Times 16-Jul-1996, [1996] UKPC 23
Links:
Citing:
Approved – Taylor v Twinberrow 1930
It was a misunderstanding of the legal effect of 12 years adverse possession under the Limitation Acts to treat it as if it gave a title: ‘the operation of the statute in giving a title is merely negative; it extinguishes the right and title of the . .
Distinguished – St Marylebone Property Co Ltd v Fairweather HL 16-Apr-1962
To defeat a defence of adverse possession, the plaintiff must succeed in an action which itself had been commenced within the twelve year period. A squatter does not succeed to the title that he has disturbed: by sufficiently long adverse possession . .
Cited – Bree v Scott 1904
(Supreme Court of Victoria) The defendant squatted from 1878 upon land allotted to her mother as Crown licensee. A Crown licensee was entitled to acquire the fee upon performance of obligations in the licence. In 1885 a Crown grant was duly issued . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Commonwealth, Limitation, Landlord and Tenant
Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.159181
