The defendant asserted title to a strip of land by adverse possession. The judge had held that the occupation by the claimant had been insufficient to establish possession.
Held: The use of the land as a garden for compost heaps and similar was a sufficient trespass to allow an action, and was therefore sufficient to found a claim for adverse possession. Having acquired a title by adverse possession, the claimant does not lose it by going out of possession, unless the original owner retakes possession. Enclosure is strong evidence of possession.
Lord Justice Butler-Sloss, Lord Justice Millett, Lord Justice Thorpe
[1997] EWCA Civ 1277, (1997) 74 P and CR 221
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Pulleyn v Hall Aggregates (Thames Valley) Ltd 1993
. .
Cited – Buckinghamshire County Council v Moran CA 13-Feb-1989
The parties’ respective properties were separated by a fence or hedge and the true owner had no access to the disputed land. In 1967 the Defendants’ predecessors in title began to maintain the land by mowing the grass and trimming the hedges and . .
Cited – Leigh v Jack CA 11-Dec-1879
The plaintiff’s predecessor in title (Mr Leigh) had laid out part of his estate as proposed streets to be known as Grundy Street and Napier Place. He conveyed to the defendant certain land described as being ‘bounded by’ Grundy Street and Napier . .
Cited – Buckinghamshire County Council v Moran CA 13-Feb-1989
The parties’ respective properties were separated by a fence or hedge and the true owner had no access to the disputed land. In 1967 the Defendants’ predecessors in title began to maintain the land by mowing the grass and trimming the hedges and . .
Cited – Gray v Wykeham Martin and Goode 17-Jan-1977
. .
Cited – Kynoch Limited v Rowlands 1912
The parties owned adjoining agricultural land divided by a dry ditch. The Plaintiffs built an enclosing wall on their own side of the ditch, cutting themselves off from access to the ditch.
Held: The true boundary between the properties lay . .
Cited by:
Cited – Tower Hamlets v Barrett and Another CA 19-Jul-2005
The defendant tenants appealed an order for them to surrender possession of land which they claimed had been acquired by adverse possession. The buildings, including one which shared a party wall with the building owned by the defendants had been . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Land, Limitation
Updated: 05 December 2021; Ref: scu.141673