Successful adverse possession cases UK

Successful adverse possession cases UK

Adverse possession is a long-established legal principle. It enables somebody without legal title (often referred to as a ‘squatter’) to gain ownership of a piece of land by being in possession long enough to replace the true owner’s title.

The Limitation Act 1980 remains the overriding principle for unregistered land but, in most cases, not for registered land. The exception is where the period of possession of the registered land began no later than 12 October 1991.

Under the Act, the ‘true’ owner’s possession of the land is statute-barred, provided the squatter can prove 12 years adverse possession to the owner’s exclusion.

Land Registration Act 2002

The Land Registration Act 2002 (“the Act”), now provides significant protection against adverse possession for owners of registered land. But a squatter can still claim title to registered land. Doing so, however, depends on proving one of the three exceptions set out in the Act.

Dowse v City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council (2020)

One of these exceptions – the “adjacent land” exception – came before the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) in 2020. The Upper Tribunal is essentially an appeals court for disputes involving land. The case in question was Dowse v City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council.

To succeed under the adjacent land exception, the squatter must establish (as set out in Schedule 6 of the Act) that:

• the adversely possessed land is adjacent to land owned by the squatter; and
• the exact boundary line between the two pieces of land is undetermined; and
• for at least 10 years before the application, the squatter (or their predecessor in title) reasonably believed that the adversely possessed land belonged to them; and
• the adversely possessed land was registered more than one year before the date of the application.

In the Dowse case, it was arguable that all of these conditions were satisfied on a literal interpretation of the test. Yet, despite that, the judge dismissed the squatter’s claim.

The judge said that to establish the “adjacent land” ground, “The whole or substantially the whole of the disputed land would have to be capable of being described as adjacent to the applicant’s land…“. However, he found that only a small part of the adversely possessed land was adjacent to the disputed land.

This case highlights that a claim for adverse possession of registered land will not succeed unless the squatter proves one of the three statutory grounds. And the grounds themselves are only likely to apply in a limited number of scenarios.

Thorpe v Frank (2019)

However, if the disputed land, can the squatter prove the period of adverse possession began no later than 12 October 1991? If so, the legal position is the same as for unregistered land. A very interesting case in point was Thorpe v Frank (2019).

In about 1986, Mrs Thorpe paved a triangular plot of land belonging to her neighbours. Thereafter, she swept the paved area, power-washed it, kept it weed-free and parked her car there. At no time, however, did Mrs Thorpe fence the area. In the proceeding years, ownership of the neighbouring property changed twice. The most recent change occurred in 2012 when Mrs Frank’s mother gifted Mr and Mrs Frank the property.

In 2013, Mrs Thorpe fenced the paved area and afterwards applied for registration as the owner. Mr and Mrs Frank objected, and the case went to the Court of Appeal. The Court held that although fencing the land would have been the clearest way to demonstrate possession, Mrs Thorpe had nevertheless demonstrated the typical actions of an owner in removing the old surface, putting down hardcore, and laying paving slabs. Those actions were sufficient to interfere with the ownership of Mr and Mrs Frank and their predecessors. Therefore, the Court upheld Mrs Thorpe’s entitlement to registration as the land owner.

Claiming land from council

Many claims for adverse possession involve council-owned land. An opportunist homeowner extending their boundary fence to incorporate council-owned land into their garden is a typical example. Nothing prevents the adverse possession of publicly owned land, and a successful claim depends on the usual rules being satisfied.