Naeem Nazir & Anor v Dilshad Begum
[2024] EWHC 378 (KB)
Cantwell & Ors v D Minney
4 May 2023
[2023] EWHC 1546 (KB)
High Court
Mr. Minney claimed he owned some land because he'd lived there a long time. The judge said even if he was right about how long he'd been there, the law says he still didn't own the land. He also couldn't use a special rule that sometimes lets people who live somewhere for a long time to claim ownership because he admitted he knew he didn't own it all along.
Key Facts
- •Mr. Darren Minney (defendant/appellant) claimed adverse possession of land since 2009.
- •The land was unregistered until 2017 when the claimants (administrators/executors) registered it.
- •The Recorder rejected Minney's claim, finding adverse possession began in 2016, not 2009.
- •Minney's application for permission to appeal was initially refused by Mr. Justice Eyre.
- •Minney's appeal arguments centered on the admissibility of fresh evidence (police report) and the Recorder's interpretation of the Land Registration Act 2002 (sections 98 and Schedule 6).
Legal Principles
Adverse possession requirements under the Land Registration Act 2002.
Land Registration Act 2002
Effect of land registration on ongoing adverse possession claims.
Land Registration Act 2002
Equitable estoppel as a potential defence against possession claims.
Megarry & Wade
Outcomes
Permission to appeal refused.
While the fresh evidence might have impacted the finding on the start date of adverse possession, it wouldn't have altered the ultimate outcome because Minney couldn't satisfy the requirements of section 98, particularly Schedule 6, paragraph 5(4). Further, his claim of equitable estoppel failed because he admitted he never believed he owned the land.