Adverse possession

Adverse possession

This Overview sets out the principal resources which are available within the Adverse Possession sub-topic.

Practice Notes

The law on adverse possession differs depending on whether the land is registered or unregistered, and when the period of adverse possession was completed. There is one regime for all unregistered land as well as registered land where the period of adverse possession was completed before 13 October 2003, and another for registered land where the period of adverse possession was completed on or after 13 October 2003.

Practice Note: Establishing adverse possession of land considers the essential elements to any claim of adverse possession, ie factual possession, intention to possess, and the required period of possession. It also discusses various uses of land which may provide sufficient evidence of factual possession and/or an intention to possess.

Practice Note: Claiming title by adverse possession under the Limitation Act 1980 or the Land Registration Act 1925 explains when it is possible to claim title by way of adverse possession under the Limitation Act 1980 (LA 1980) or the ...

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

TAKE A FREE TRIAL

Latest Property News

Property weekly highlights—29 May 2025

This week's edition of Property weekly highlights includes: cases on the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999, equitable accounting by a mortgagee, modification of restrictive covenants, tenants’ insurance payments and exemption from business rates, a consultation and a working paper on planning reforms to boost housing delivery, consultations on biodiversity and updated guidance on higher-risk buildings.

MHCLG clarifies position on roof gardens as storeys

The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) has issued an updated notice clarifying its position following the First-tier Tribunal’s decision on 3 July 2024, in Smoke House & Curing House, 18 Remus Road, London E3 2NF: LON/00BG/HYI/2023/0024. MHCLG acknowledges the need for legislative clarity and is consulting the Building Safety Regulator and other stakeholders on a proposal to amend the Higher-Risk Buildings (Descriptions and Supplementary Provisions) Regulations 2023, SI 2023/275, to confirm that roof gardens should not be classified as a storey when determining whether a building is a higher-risk building under section 120D of the Building Act 1984 (BA 1984) and section 65 of the Building Safety Act 2022 (BSA 2022). In the interim, MHCLG maintains that roof gardens are not considered storeys for these purposes, and advises the sector and regulatory bodies to continue following current guidance.

Supreme Court affirms developer’s right to bring negligence, DPA 1972 and contribution claims f...

Construction analysis: This is the latest instalment in a series of decisions arising out of claims by a developer (BDW) against its structural engineer (URS) in respect of structural defects in two residential developments, where the repair works were carried out at a time when it no longer had any proprietary interest in the developments and no claims had been intimated by the any third parties. In its much-anticipated judgment, the Supreme Court affirmed the decisions of the Technology and Construction Court and the Court of Appeal, holding that: (i) the repair costs fell within URS’s scope of duty and were not too remote; (ii) the retrospectively extended limitation period in section 135(3) of the Building Safety Act 2022 meant that there was no relevant time bar at the time of the repair works; (iii) URS owed a duty under section 1(1)(a) of the Defective Premises Act 1972 (DPA 1972) to BDW as the developer; (iv) BDW was entitled to claim a contribution from URS when it had paid compensation (in kind) by carrying out the repairs. However, the Supreme Court refrained from considering the principles on the accrual of a tortious claim and preferred to leave that question to a future case. Written by Mathias Cheung, barrister at Atkin Chambers.

MHCLG publishes working paper on site threshold reforms

The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) has published a working paper, proposing reforms to site thresholds in the planning system to better support housing delivery across different types of sites. The paper proposes a gradated approach, with three separate thresholds: minor (fewer than ten dwellings), medium (between ten and 49 dwellings), and major (50 or more dwellings). It explores how each threshold should be treated and seeks views on: (1) streamlining disproportionate requirements for small and medium sites; (2) introducing a new ‘medium’ threshold for development; and (3) strengthening requirements for larger, strategic sites. The deadline for responses is 9 July 2025, with responses intended to inform a formal consultation later in 2025.