header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
23 April 2009 / Elizabeth Fitzgerald , John Summers
Issue: 7366 / Categories: Features , Property
printer mail-detail

To own or not to own

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

John Summers & Elizabeth Fitzgerald consider the impact of Ofulue

It is an important and well known rule of evidence that communications which are expressed to be “without prejudice”, and which are made between parties to a dispute for the purposes of settling the dispute, cannot generally be admitted in evidence.

In Ofulue & Anor v Bossert [2009] UKHL 16, [2009] All ER (D) 119 (Mar) the House of Lords considered the extent to which it was permissible to rely on a “without prejudice” statement written with a view to settling earlier proceedings in the context of an adverse possession claim in which the “without prejudice” statement was said to constitute an acknowledgement of title which stopped time running.

The facts

Mr and Mrs Ofulue had been the registered freehold proprietors of 61 Coborn Road since 1976. In 1981 they went to Nigeria and let the property to tenants. In 1981, Mr Bossert and his daughter were let into occupation by one of the tenants, Ms Osborne. In 1989

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Newcastle & North of England Law Society—Lesley Fairclough

Newcastle & North of England Law Society—Lesley Fairclough

Ward Hadaway partner becomes bicentennial president following regional merger

Devonshires—four promotions

Devonshires—four promotions

Firm promotes four senior associates to partner in annual round

Fieldfisher—John McElroy & Daniel Hayward

Fieldfisher—John McElroy & Daniel Hayward

Co-heads of dispute resolution practice appointed alongside partner promotions

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Mazur and more—inside the litigation frontline

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

NLJ this week: Social media bans for children spark legal dilemmas
Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
NLJ this week: Leasehold reform risks creating ‘forgotten freeholders’
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
NLJ this week: Court of Appeal clarifies when a claim truly begins
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
NLJ this week: Split FDRs could ease pressure—and boost settlements
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll