Adcock v Davis [2005] EWCA Civ 1638 (01 December 2005)
The trial judge was entitled to find, on the evidence, that the claimant's use of the land was with the paper owner's consent and not by adverse possession. There was no basis for the appellate court to interfere with the judge's findings of fact, and the application to admit further medical evidence was refused as untimely and unpersuasive.
- Citation
- [2005] EWCA Civ 1638
- Parties
- Claimant/applicant: Richard Adcock; Defendant/respondent: Wendy Joy Davis
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 01 December 2005
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal
- Outcome
- Application for permission to appeal refused
- Legal Topics
- Adverse Possession, Findings of Fact, Appeals Procedure
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Richard Adcock
Claimant/applicant
Wendy Joy Davis
Defendant/respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the claimant was entitled to be registered as proprietor of a strip of land by adverse possession
- 2 Whether the trial judge's findings of fact were plainly wrong
- 3 Whether further medical evidence regarding a witness's capacity should be admitted on appeal
Ratio Decidendi
The trial judge was entitled to find, on the evidence, that the claimant's use of the land was with the paper owner's consent and not by adverse possession. There was no basis for the appellate court to interfere with the judge's findings of fact, and the application to admit further medical evidence was refused as untimely and unpersuasive.
Court Disposition
Application for permission to appeal refused
Orders
- Application refused
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment