Graham & Ors v Mayrick

Graham & Ors v Mayrick

Permission to appeal is granted because the points raised are arguable, particularly as the second point arose only at the hearing before Hart J and had not previously been taken. The first point may raise a question of general importance regarding the requirements for adverse possession.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Sir Alexander Michael Graham & Others; Defendant/appellant: Brian Mayrick
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 June 2006
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal (second Appeal)
Outcome
permission to appeal granted; stay of execution granted
Legal Topics
Adverse Possession, Appeals, Summary Judgment, Title to Land

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sir Alexander Michael Graham & Others

Claimant/respondent

Brian Mayrick

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal (second Appeal)

  1. 1 Whether claimants must prove identity of dispossessed paper title owner in adverse possession claims
  2. 2 Whether the judge erred in finding the defendant had not established 12 years' adverse possession
  3. 3 Whether the judge improperly refused to admit further evidence on exclusive possession

Ratio Decidendi

Permission to appeal is granted because the points raised are arguable, particularly as the second point arose only at the hearing before Hart J and had not previously been taken. The first point may raise a question of general importance regarding the requirements for adverse possession.

Court Disposition

permission to appeal granted; stay of execution granted

Orders

  • Permission to appeal granted
  • Stay of execution granted