London Borough of Lambeth v Archangel [2000] EWCA Civ 303 (01 December 2000)

London Borough of Lambeth v Archangel [2000] EWCA Civ 303 (01 December 2000)

The letter written by Mr Archangel in February 1993 constituted a clear acknowledgement of the Council's superior title to the property, interrupting the period required for adverse possession. Extrinsic evidence was admissible to identify the property as 75 Stockwell Park Road. The appeal was dismissed on this basis.

Citation
[2000] EWCA Civ 303
Parties
Claimant/respondent: The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Lambeth; Defendant/appellant: Michael Archangel
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 December 2000
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Adverse Possession, Limitation Act 1980, Acknowledgement of Title
Property Law Civil Procedure Adverse Possession Limitation Act 1980 Acknowledgement of Title

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Lambeth

Claimant/respondent

Michael Archangel

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a letter written by the appellant constituted an acknowledgement of the Council's title under the Limitation Act 1980, thereby defeating the defence of adverse possession.
  2. 2 Whether extrinsic evidence could be used to identify the property referenced in the letter.

Ratio Decidendi

The letter written by Mr Archangel in February 1993 constituted a clear acknowledgement of the Council's superior title to the property, interrupting the period required for adverse possession. Extrinsic evidence was admissible to identify the property as 75 Stockwell Park Road. The appeal was dismissed on this basis.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The Borough Council to recover three quarters of its costs, to be paid by the Legal Aid Commission.
  • The appellant's costs to be assessed in accordance with Community Legal Services (Costs) Regulations 2000.