Baldwin King and Hariette Richardson v Gershon Robertson

Baldwin King and Hariette Richardson v Gershon Robertson

Edward and his successors acquired a good possessory title to the disputed land through adverse possession for more than twelve years before the Limitation Act 1988 came into force, under the Real Property Limitation Act 1851, which permitted adverse possession between beneficiaries. Thus, Mr King and Miss...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Baldwin King; Appellant: Hariette Richardson; Respondent: Gershon Robertson
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 October 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Adverse Possession, Entail, Limitation of Actions, Beneficiaries Under Trust
Property Law Trusts and Estates Adverse Possession Entail Limitation of Actions Beneficiaries Under Trust

Source-derived case record

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Baldwin King

Appellant

Hariette Richardson

Appellant

Gershon Robertson

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Edward or his successors acquired possessory title to disputed land through adverse possession
  2. 2 Whether William's will created a valid entail
  3. 3 Whether the Limitation Act 1988 or the Real Property Limitation Act 1851 applied to the dispute

Ratio Decidendi

Edward and his successors acquired a good possessory title to the disputed land through adverse possession for more than twelve years before the Limitation Act 1988 came into force, under the Real Property Limitation Act 1851, which permitted adverse possession between beneficiaries. Thus, Mr King and Miss Richardson's title is valid and any claim by Gershon Robertson or those through whom he claims was extinguished.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • Appeal allowed; written submissions invited on form of order and consequential matters including costs