Devere, R (on the application of) v Land Registry [2013] EWHC 2477 (Admin) (21 October 2013)

Devere, R (on the application of) v Land Registry [2013] EWHC 2477 (Admin) (21 October 2013)

The claimants had no legal or equitable interest in the land or moorings in question, had not acquired title by adverse possession, and the statutory authorities lawfully exercised their powers to register title and regulate mooring. The applications for judicial review were totally without merit and an abuse of...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2013] EWHC 2477 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: David Frank DeVere; Defendant: Land Registry; Interested Party: Canal & River Trust; Interested Party: Nigel Moore; Interested Party: James Mason; Interested Party: Port of London Authority
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 October 2013
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Renewed Applications for Permission to Apply for Judicial Review
Outcome
Permission to apply for judicial review refused; applications dismissed as totally without merit.
Legal Topics
Land Registration, Adverse Possession, Mooring Rights, Public Right of Navigation, Statutory Powers of Navigation Authorities
Property Law Administrative Law Land Registration Adverse Possession Mooring Rights Public Right of Navigation Statutory Powers of Navigation Authorities

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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Frank DeVere

Claimant

Land Registry

Defendant

Canal & River Trust

Interested Party

Nigel Moore

Interested Party

James Mason

Interested Party

Port of London Authority

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Renewed Applications for Permission to Apply for Judicial Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Land Registry's decisions to register title to canal and river land in favour of Canal & River Trust and Port of London Authority were lawful
  2. 2 Whether the claimants or interested parties had any legal or equitable interest in the land or mooring rights by adverse possession or otherwise
  3. 3 Whether the statutory navigation authorities had power to regulate mooring and navigation on the relevant waterways

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants had no legal or equitable interest in the land or moorings in question, had not acquired title by adverse possession, and the statutory authorities lawfully exercised their powers to register title and regulate mooring. The applications for judicial review were totally without merit and an abuse of process.

Court Disposition

Permission to apply for judicial review refused; applications dismissed as totally without merit.

Orders

  • Applications for permission to apply for judicial review refused.
  • No order as to costs due to parties' non-participation or self-representation.