header-logo header-logo

25 October 2013 / Brie Stevens-Hoare KC
Issue: 7581 / Categories: Features , Property
printer mail-detail

The lie of the land

istock_000016787219medium

Concurrent registration trumps adverse possession says Brie Stevens-Hoare QC

We all know that possession is not actually 9/10ths of English property law but would probably say it counts for a lot and is a good start. The other good starting point is a registered interest. So how did the respondents in Parshall v Hackney [2013] 2 WLR 605, [2013] All ER (D) 258 (Mar) have no entitlement to property despite having registered title and 20 years plus of exclusive physical possession?

The questions

Everyone makes mistakes, even the Land Registry. Unregistered slivers of land and concurrent registration can result. The way to deal with a gap between registered titles is clear. Proceed as if seeking first registration: find evidence of paper title and/or possession, knowing adverse possession may be key. When there are two registered titles there are two registered proprietors. How do you know who is entitled to the land? How do applications for rectification of the register work? What relevance does factual possession or adverse possession have?

A

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Regional law firm expands employment team with partner and senior associate hires

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Nottinghamtrusts, estates and tax team welcomes two senior associates

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
back-to-top-scroll