Tracey Enterprises MacAdam Limited v Drury [2006] IEHC 381 (24 November 2006)

Tracey Enterprises MacAdam Limited v Drury [2006] IEHC 381 (24 November 2006)

The defendant's use of the disputed plot prior to 2000 was sporadic and did not constitute possession adverse to the plaintiff's title. The defendant did not demonstrate the necessary animus possidendi or intention to exclude the true owner. The evidence did not establish that the defendant acquired title by adverse...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2006] IEHC 381
Parties
Plaintiff: Tracey Enterprises MacAdam Limited; Defendant: Thomas Drury
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
24 November 2006
Procedural Posture
Plenary Summons / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Plaintiff declared owner of the disputed plot; defendant's claim to adverse possession rejected; no damages awarded.
Legal Topics
Adverse Possession, Title to Land, Statute of Limitations, Boundary Dispute
Property Law Adverse Possession Title to Land Statute of Limitations Boundary Dispute

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tracey Enterprises MacAdam Limited

Plaintiff

Thomas Drury

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Plenary Summons / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff holds title in fee simple to the disputed plot
  2. 2 Whether the defendant acquired title to the disputed plot by adverse possession

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant's use of the disputed plot prior to 2000 was sporadic and did not constitute possession adverse to the plaintiff's title. The defendant did not demonstrate the necessary animus possidendi or intention to exclude the true owner. The evidence did not establish that the defendant acquired title by adverse possession. The plaintiff remains the owner in fee simple of the disputed plot.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff declared owner of the disputed plot; defendant's claim to adverse possession rejected; no damages awarded.

Orders

  • Declaration that the disputed plot was at all material times and remains in the ownership of the plaintiff.
  • No order for damages.