header-logo header-logo

03 June 2022 / Richard Oughton
Issue: 7981 / Categories: Features , Property
printer mail-detail

Reasonable belief in adverse possession

83601
Any ten years will do: Richard Oughton hails the return of clarity & common sense to claims for adverse possession
  • In claiming title by adverse possession of registered land upon the ground of an uncertain boundary, a party must reasonably believe that they own the disputed land for ten years.
  • As a result of two decisions of the Court of Appeal, it has previously been unclear whether any ten years could be relied upon, or if the ten years had to be immediately before the application to the Land Registry.
  • The recent decision of the First-tier Tribunal in Crook v Zurich has decisively resolved the point by holding that any ten years’ belief is sufficient.

The Land Registration Act 2002 (LRA 2002) prospectively restricted the acquisition of title by adverse possession to registered land, save in three specific cases, although in each of these cases, the period of adverse possession is reduced from twelve to ten years. The only important case is para 5(4) of Sch 6, LRA 2002 which applies where (emphasis added):

a. the land to which the application

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

DWF—11 appointments

DWF—11 appointments

DWF strengthens North West teams with 11 newly qualified solicitors

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll