London Borough Of Lambeth v Blackburn [2001] EWCA Civ 668 (10 April 2001)

London Borough Of Lambeth v Blackburn [2001] EWCA Civ 668 (10 April 2001)

There is a tenable argument that the defendant's actions and evidence could satisfy the requirement of intention to possess for adverse possession, and the judge may have misapplied the legal standard by focusing on intention to own rather than intention to possess.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 668
Parties
Claimant/respondent: London Borough of Lambeth; Defendant/applicant: Jack Blackburn
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 April 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal; Extension of Time
Outcome
Permission to appeal granted; extension of time granted
Legal Topics
Adverse Possession, Intention to Possess, Extension of Time, Permission to Appeal
Property Law Civil Procedure Adverse Possession Intention to Possess Extension of Time Permission to Appeal

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

London Borough of Lambeth

Claimant/respondent

Jack Blackburn

Defendant/applicant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal; Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant had the requisite intention to possess for adverse possession
  2. 2 Whether statements about willingness to pay rent or be evicted negate animus possidendi
  3. 3 Whether the judge correctly applied the law on adverse possession

Ratio Decidendi

There is a tenable argument that the defendant's actions and evidence could satisfy the requirement of intention to possess for adverse possession, and the judge may have misapplied the legal standard by focusing on intention to own rather than intention to possess.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal granted; extension of time granted

Orders

  • Application allowed
  • Costs to be costs in the appeal