Tennant & Anor v Adamczyk & Anor [2005] EWCA Civ 1239 (04 October 2005)

Tennant & Anor v Adamczyk & Anor [2005] EWCA Civ 1239 (04 October 2005)

The respondents did not establish exclusive factual possession or intention to possess the disputed land before October 1991; acts after that date were irrelevant for limitation purposes. Therefore, the appellants' claim was not statute barred and the trial judge erred in holding otherwise.

Citation
[2005] EWCA Civ 1239
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Barrie Tennant; Claimant/appellant: Eric Burke; Defendant/respondent: Richard Adamczyk; Defendant/respondent: William Ellis
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 October 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Adverse Possession, Limitation of Actions, Land Registration, Boundary Disputes
Property Law Civil Procedure Adverse Possession Limitation of Actions Land Registration Boundary Disputes

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Barrie Tennant

Claimant/appellant

Eric Burke

Claimant/appellant

Richard Adamczyk

Defendant/respondent

William Ellis

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim to recover land was statute barred by adverse possession under the Limitation Act 1980
  2. 2 Whether the respondents had acquired title by adverse possession before the critical date in October 1991

Ratio Decidendi

The respondents did not establish exclusive factual possession or intention to possess the disputed land before October 1991; acts after that date were irrelevant for limitation purposes. Therefore, the appellants' claim was not statute barred and the trial judge erred in holding otherwise.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Declaration that the appellants own the disputed land and as to the true boundary as contended for in Plan A of the Particulars of Claim
  • Claim for removal of fence, damages, and mesne profits remitted to County Court for determination