Pilford & Anor v Greenmanor Ltd [2012] EWCA Civ 756 (15 May 2012)

Pilford & Anor v Greenmanor Ltd [2012] EWCA Civ 756 (15 May 2012)

The respondents' acts—erecting and maintaining a fence, nailing shut a gate, constructing a step, storing materials, and altering the land—constituted sufficient factual possession and intention to possess for adverse possession. The acts were open and manifest. However, the respondents' use of the appellant's land for vehicular access to No. 125 was an actionable wrong, but an injunction was inappropriate due to delay and expenditure; damages in lieu were appropriate.

Citation
[2012] EWCA Civ 756
Parties
Respondent/claimant: Mr Laurence Pilford; Respondent/claimant: Mrs Doreen Pilford; Appellant/defendant: Greenmanor Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 May 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed in respect of counterclaim only; damages in lieu of injunction ordered and remitted to county court for assessment; otherwise, appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Adverse Possession, Easements, Injunctions, Damages in Lieu of Injunction, Counterclaim
Property Law Civil Procedure Adverse Possession Easements Injunctions Damages in Lieu of Injunction Counterclaim

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Laurence Pilford

Respondent/claimant

Mrs Doreen Pilford

Respondent/claimant

Greenmanor Limited

Appellant/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondents acquired title to the compound land by adverse possession
  2. 2 Whether the respondents committed an actionable wrong by using the appellant's land for vehicular access to No. 125
  3. 3 Whether the appellant is entitled to an injunction or damages in lieu

Ratio Decidendi

The respondents' acts—erecting and maintaining a fence, nailing shut a gate, constructing a step, storing materials, and altering the land—constituted sufficient factual possession and intention to possess for adverse possession. The acts were open and manifest. However, the respondents' use of the appellant's land for vehicular access to No. 125 was an actionable wrong, but an injunction was inappropriate due to delay and expenditure; damages in lieu were appropriate.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in respect of counterclaim only; damages in lieu of injunction ordered and remitted to county court for assessment; otherwise, appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • Respondents declared to have acquired title to compound land by adverse possession.
  • Respondents entitled to certain easements (no appeal).