Burns v Anthony & Anor [1997] EWCA Civ 2106 (15 July 1997)

Burns v Anthony & Anor [1997] EWCA Civ 2106 (15 July 1997)

The plaintiff and his predecessors in title exercised exclusive possession and control over the disputed land for the statutory period, regularly using it for business purposes, and the defendants' use was occasional, non-exclusive, and by consent. The necessary intention to possess was inferred from the plaintiff's actions. The defendants failed to establish joint occupation or possession.

Citation
[1997] EWCA Civ 2106
Parties
Respondent/plaintiff: Richard Burns; Appellant/first Defendant: George Anthony; Appellant/second Defendant: Eugenia Anthony
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 July 1997
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Court of Appeal (civil Division) Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Adverse Possession, Limitation of Actions, Exclusive Possession
Property Law Civil Procedure Adverse Possession Limitation of Actions Exclusive Possession

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Richard Burns

Respondent/plaintiff

George Anthony

Appellant/first Defendant

Eugenia Anthony

Appellant/second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Court of Appeal (civil Division) Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff acquired title to the disputed land by adverse possession
  2. 2 Whether the defendants were in occupation or possession of the disputed land during the relevant period

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff and his predecessors in title exercised exclusive possession and control over the disputed land for the statutory period, regularly using it for business purposes, and the defendants' use was occasional, non-exclusive, and by consent. The necessary intention to possess was inferred from the plaintiff's actions. The defendants failed to establish joint occupation or possession.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Respondent's costs against Legal Aid Fund under section 18
  • Legal aid taxation