White & Anor v Amirtharaja & Anor [2022] EWCA Civ 11 (13 January 2022)

White & Anor v Amirtharaja & Anor [2022] EWCA Civ 11 (13 January 2022)

The paper title point was not raised at trial and should not have been permitted on appeal, but this did not affect the outcome because the High Court judge's decision was based on the insufficiency and equivocal nature of the evidence of adverse possession and intention to possess. The appeal is dismissed as the essential reasoning and outcome were not dependent on the procedural irregularity.

Citation
[2022] EWCA Civ 11
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Colin White; Claimant/appellant: Frances White; Defendant/respondent: Merwin Amirthan Amirtharaja; Defendant/respondent: Jennifer Shiromi Amirtharaja
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 January 2022
Procedural Posture
Second Appeal (court of Appeal, Civil Division) / Judgment on Appeal From High Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Adverse Possession, Land Registration, Mistake in Registration, Paper Title, Procedural Irregularity
Property Law Civil Procedure Adverse Possession Land Registration Mistake in Registration Paper Title Procedural Irregularity

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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Colin White

Claimant/appellant

Frances White

Claimant/appellant

Merwin Amirthan Amirtharaja

Defendant/respondent

Jennifer Shiromi Amirtharaja

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Second Appeal (court of Appeal, Civil Division) / Judgment on Appeal From High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court judge erred in permitting a new point (paper title) to be raised on appeal
  2. 2 Whether the acts relied on established adverse possession and intention to possess
  3. 3 Whether registration of possessory title was a mistake

Ratio Decidendi

The paper title point was not raised at trial and should not have been permitted on appeal, but this did not affect the outcome because the High Court judge's decision was based on the insufficiency and equivocal nature of the evidence of adverse possession and intention to possess. The appeal is dismissed as the essential reasoning and outcome were not dependent on the procedural irregularity.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed