Brian Larman v The Estate of Gerald Ernest Linzell & Ors
[2024] UKUT 57 (LC)
Alistdair Barclay Brown v Richard John Ridley & Anor
23 January 2024
[2024] UKUT 14 (LC)
Upper Tribunal
Two neighbours fought over a small piece of land. A court ruling said that to claim the land, the neighbour had to show they believed it was theirs for 10 years before claiming it. A higher court clarified that the 10-year period must end just before the claim is made. Because the claiming neighbour couldn't prove this, they lost their claim to the land.
Key Facts
- •Appeal against a First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) decision regarding adverse possession of land.
- •Dispute over a strip of land ('Disputed Land') between adjoining properties.
- •Respondents applied to the Land Registry for registration as proprietors based on adverse possession.
- •Appellant (registered proprietor) opposed the application.
- •Central issue: Interpretation of paragraph 5(4)(c) of Schedule 6 to the Land Registration Act 2002 concerning the 'reasonable belief' requirement for adverse possession.
- •Specific question: Does the 10-year period of reasonable belief refer to any 10-year period within the adverse possession, or only the 10 years ending on the application date?
- •First-tier Tribunal decided the 10-year period could be any 10-year period within the adverse possession.
Legal Principles
The ratio decidendi of a case is any rule of law expressly or impliedly treated by the judge as a necessary step in reaching his conclusion.
R (Kadhim) v Brent London Borough Council Housing Benefit Review Board [2001] 1 QB 955
A subsequent court is not bound by a proposition of law assumed by an earlier court that was not the subject of argument.
R (Kadhim) v Brent London Borough Council Housing Benefit Review Board [2001] 1 QB 955
Statutory interpretation involves an objective assessment of the meaning a reasonable legislature would convey.
R (O) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2022] UKSC 3
An appellate court will only rarely interfere with findings of fact made by a trial judge unless the finding is unsupported by evidence or no reasonable judge could have reached it.
Haringey LBC v Ahmed [2017] EWCA Civ 1861
On a challenge to an evaluative decision, the appeal court asks if the decision was wrong due to an identifiable flaw.
Re Sprintroom Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 932
Outcomes
Appeal allowed.
The Upper Tribunal held that Zarb v Parry established binding authority that the 10-year reasonable belief period in paragraph 5(4)(c) is the 10 years ending on the application date.
Cross-appeal dismissed.
The Upper Tribunal found no basis to challenge the First-tier Tribunal's findings on when the Respondents' reasonable belief ended.
Decision of the First-tier Tribunal set aside and remade.
The Upper Tribunal directed the Chief Land Registrar to cancel the application because the Respondents did not satisfy the reasonable belief condition.