• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Celebrity Couple Problem.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Adverse Possession Seminar Celebrity Couple Problem Question In order to accurately asses the legal standing of the parties involved in this scenario we must look at the principles of adverse possession and their effect on the facts of this particular case. Adverse possession can be defined, as any possession that has been taken that is not consistent to the title of the true owner.1 Adverse possession can lead to the legal title of the true owner being voided and passed to the squatter where they will acquire a legal title through being in possession. There are a number of factors, which have to be satisfied in relation to a legitimate claim for adverse possession and theses will be discussed in relation to the facts of the case in hand. The squatter must establish possession over a period of 12 years; this possession must be continuous over that period. The couple in question purchased and moved into the house in 1990. ...read more.

Middle

In our scenario the elderly couple are clearly not in occupation of the pool house, pool, or the tennis court. The fact they are termed as "disused" would lead you to believe they have not been taken care of in terms of up keep and or regular use. However there is an exception that the true owner must have the physical/ mental ability to posses the land and to find out whether or the land is being possessed. Here it is stated that the true owners are old, housebound and their property is a large country estate. One could therefore argue that due to their physical limitation they were unable to occupy their land or find out if their property was being adversely possessed. The counter argument to this would be a large country estate usually would have a significant number of staff eg. Grounds men/gardeners who would be able to carry out the necessary work or ascertain if squatters were present. There must be an intention to "exclude the owner as well as other people" Powel v McFarlane (1977.) ...read more.

Conclusion

(Here the celebrity couple may wish to reiterate their argument of future intentions and preparation of the land. Wallis Catton Bay Holiday Camp v Shell-Mex and BP Ltd (1975.)Farming of land deemed to be sufficient. Secondly the act of excluding the owner as well as other people may be seen as unfulfilled. The access to this field was at no point cut off. The fact the field is bordered on one edge by a public road with a "discontinuous hedge," means it is/was not, at any point, exclusive of the true owner or any other person who wishes to wander through a gap In the hedge and therefore no right can be acquired. It would be for the judge to decide upon the points of contention raised in the arguments above and to take into consideration the abilities, action and intention of each of the parties whether or not adverse possession would be granted in each of the two cases. 1 The law of real Property D Bell pp337 ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our University Degree Land Law section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related University Degree Land Law essays

  1. The Land Registration Act 2002 heralds major changes to the law and procedures regarding ...

    In addition, the idea of trust on registered land is no more applicable under this new scheme as title will no longer be extinguished through possession[75] and will only be transferred when the register is changed.[76] These changes seem to be appropriate as it now makes it impossible for a sensible registered proprietor to be dispossessed without his knowledge.

  2. Land Law Problem Question; Adverse Possession, Easements, Covenants and Overriding Interests.

    In the eventuality of this the paper title owner (Nigel) would have two years to evict the squatter (Mark). If Nigel fails to this then Mark will have another opportunity to apply to be registered as proprietor and Nigel will be unable to defend the application.

  1. This problem question deals with the law of adverse possession of land.

    of limitation can run.5 The result of land being adversely possessed for the entire period of limitation is that the original landowner's title is completely extinguished,6 putting the adverse possessor of the land in the position of having a possessory title which is good against the whole world.

  2. Tenancy case question. The problem faced by Linda is whether or not Terry, Tina ...

    see that where a term inserted in to an agreement to prevent exclusive possession from taking place, will be a 'sham' if neither of the parties wish to enforce that term. Cases highlighting this issue include Antoniades v Villiers9, where the agreement stated "the licensor shall be entitled at any time to use the rooms...

  1. Co-ownership on Family Home

    whereby, Lord Bridge stressed the necessity for a 'direct financial contribution' to justify the imposition of a constructive trust in the inability of proving an express agreement, to prove common intent. Otherwise, his Lordship said that there must be 'any express agreement or understanding reached that the property is to be shared beneficially'13.

  2. Property Law - Problem Question

    In registered land the basic rule is that the owner of the prior estate has priority over the buyer of any subsequent estate in the land (s28 Land Registration Act 2002), but until electronic conveyancing changes the face of land law major exceptions still apply (s29 LRA 2002).

  1. The Mirror Principle and the Land Act of 2002. Analysis and case problem ...

    4 Section 11(4) (b) of the Land Registration Act 2002 states that "The estate is vested in the proprietor subject only to the following interests affecting the estate at the time of the registration - (b) unregistered interests which fall within any of the paragraphs of Schedule 1."

  2. Land law problem question - access

    a grantee must be a definite person or body.[32]Besides, the right must be sufficiently definite, which must be capable of reasonably of exact description.[33] Lastly, the right must be within the general nature of rights capable of existing as easements.[34] This is unlikely to be a problem as rights of way are an established category of easement.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work