Adverse possession

Adverse possession permits a squatter to acquire title through continuous factual possession with intention to possess (animus possidendi) for a prescribed period. The doctrine operates fundamentally differently between unregistered land (Limitation Act 1980: automatic extinguishment of paper owner's title after 12 years) and registered land (Land Registration Act 2002: procedural mechanism requiring application after 10 years, with notice to registered proprietor who may object). Under the 1980 Act, the paper owner's title is extinguished, not transferred — the squatter's possessory title fills the vacuum through relativity of title. Under the 2002 Act, adverse possession survives only through narrow exceptions: estoppel (para 5(2)), other entitlement (para 5(3)), or boundary disputes (para 5(4)). The doctrine reflects tension between protecting property rights and rewarding productive use, with the 2002 reforms privileging registration over possession while preserving curative functions.

JA Pye (Oxford) Ltd v Graham [2002] UKHL 30: Grahams continued grazing after licence expired; acquired title after 12 years. House of Lords held intention to possess requires neither intention to own nor to exclude owner 'so far as reasonably practicable' — mere intention to possess suffices. Acquiescence without express agreement creates no implied licence.

Zarb v Parry [2011] EWCA Civ 1306: Squatter maintained paddock for 10 years believing it hers; succeeded under estoppel exception (Sch 6, para 5(2)). Establishes estoppel must arise from the possession itself, not merely any estoppel between parties.

Powell v McFarlane (1977) 38 P & CR 452: Slade J articulated test for factual possession: 'appropriate degree of physical control' plus intention to possess. Factual possession assessed contextually by reference to nature of land.

Best v Chief Land Registrar [2015] EWCA Civ 17: Boundary exception (para 5(4)) applied to garage where squatter reasonably believed it was his for 10 years. Demonstrates para 5(4) applies to structures, not just strips of land.

JA Pye v United Kingdom (2008) 46 EHRR 45: Grand Chamber (10-7) held no violation of A1P1, emphasising states' wide margin of appreciation and legitimate aims of certainty and finality. Narrow majority reveals doctrine's controversial normative foundations.

Courts require proof of two elements: (1) Factual possession: appropriate degree of physical control assessed contextually — enclosure/fencing, cultivation, exclusion of others indicate possession; trivial acts like dog-walking insufficient (Tecbild). Possession must be exclusive though intermittent use can suffice if showing general control. (2) Animus possidendi: intention to possess (not own) to exclusion of all others including paper owner (Pye [41]). Permission/licence negates animus.

For unregistered land: after 12 years continuous adverse possession, paper owner's title automatically extinguished (s 17 LA 1980). For registered land: after 10 years, squatter applies under Sch 6; registrar notifies proprietor who may object. If objection succeeds, squatter gets further 2 years — if proprietor fails to evict, second application cannot be opposed. Always identify which regime applies first. Check for acknowledgment (s 29) or payment restarting time.

Confusing regimes: Students fail to distinguish registered/unregistered land at outset — state which applies immediately. Conflating elements: Address factual possession and animus separately; control without intent (or vice versa) fails. Assuming automatic title: In registered land, 10 years' possession does not confer title — squatter must apply, and proprietor's objection defeats claim unless narrow para 5 exceptions apply. Inferring licences: Post-Pye, mere acquiescence creates no implied licence — only express/clearly implied permission suffices. Missing procedure: Track Sch 6 steps methodically — application, notice, objection, exceptions, two-year grace period. Oversimplifying human rights: Pye v UK was 10-7; discuss both majority reasoning (margin of appreciation, public interest) and dissent (deprivation without compensation).