Scanlon -v- Larkin & Ors [2011] IEHC 549 (27 January 2011)

Scanlon -v- Larkin & Ors [2011] IEHC 549 (27 January 2011)

The defendants failed to prove, on the balance of probabilities, that they or their predecessors erected and maintained a fence in 1958 or exercised exclusive possession of the claimed lands for the requisite period. The evidence did not establish the necessary intention to possess or sufficient degree of exclusive control to extinguish the plaintiff's title by adverse possession under the Statute of Limitations 1957.

Citation
[2011] IEHC 549
Parties
Plaintiff: Seamus Scanlon; Defendant: Gerald Larkin; Defendant: James Larkin; Defendant: Larkin Quarries Limited; Defendant: Galway County Council
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
27 January 2011
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Circuit Court (equity Civil Bill) / Judgment After Full Hearing on Appeal
Outcome
Defendants' appeal dismissed; plaintiff's title upheld.
Legal Topics
Adverse Possession, Commonage Rights, Statute of Limitations, Evidentiary Burden
Property Law Civil Procedure Adverse Possession Commonage Rights Statute of Limitations Evidentiary Burden

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Seamus Scanlon

Plaintiff

Gerald Larkin

Defendant

James Larkin

Defendant

Larkin Quarries Limited

Defendant

Galway County Council

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Circuit Court (equity Civil Bill) / Judgment After Full Hearing on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants established adverse possession over part of the commonage lands against the plaintiff's registered title
  2. 2 Whether fencing and use since 1958 by the defendants or their predecessors extinguished the plaintiff's title under the Statute of Limitations 1957

Ratio Decidendi

The defendants failed to prove, on the balance of probabilities, that they or their predecessors erected and maintained a fence in 1958 or exercised exclusive possession of the claimed lands for the requisite period. The evidence did not establish the necessary intention to possess or sufficient degree of exclusive control to extinguish the plaintiff's title by adverse possession under the Statute of Limitations 1957.

Court Disposition

Defendants' appeal dismissed; plaintiff's title upheld.

Orders

  • Defendants have not established adverse possession; plaintiff's registered title stands.