header-logo header-logo

23 February 2018 / Gavin Bennison
Issue: 7782 / Categories: Features , Property
printer mail-detail

Possession claims against trespassers (Pt 2)

nlj_7782_bennison

In the second of a two-part series on possession claims, Gavin Bennison considers occupation of part

  • Where trespassers occupy part, but not all, of the land within a claimant’s title, the claimant may claim possession of either the entire site or of the occupied part only.
  • There are practical considerations and advantages of either option which must be borne in mind.

A previous article considered when and how practitioners bringing possession claims against trespassers in the county court under CPR Pt 55 might go about seeking injunctive relief in addition to a possession order (see ‘Possession claims against trespassers—injunctions’, NLJ , 9 February 2018, p13). This article considers two further questions which commonly arise in such cases, particularly in cases concerning trespass on large or open areas of land:

  • What is the appropriate course of action where the trespass has occurred onto part, but not all, of the area comprised within the claimant’s title?
  • If there are others lawfully in occupation of other parts of the land comprised in the claimant’s
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

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll