BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) >> Pallett v Broxbourne Borough Council (Adverse possession : Adverse possession) [2019] UKFTT 593 (PC) (27 August 2019) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKFTT/PC/2019/593.html Cite as: [2019] UKFTT 593 (PC) |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
| Case reference | REF/2018/0709 |
|---|---|
| Date of decision | 27/08/2019 |
| Adjudicator | Mr Owen Rhys |
| Applicant | (1) Brenda Pallett (2) Michael Mahoney |
| Respondent | Broxbourne Borough Council |
| Main Category & Sub Category | |
| Category | Adverse possession |
| Sub Category | Factual possession |
| Secondary Category & Sub Category | |
| Category | Adverse possession |
| Sub Category | Factual possession |
| Decision notes | [2019] UKFTT 593 (PC). Application for adverse possession under Schedule 6 of part of a title first registered in 2005. Respondent local authority, and owner of the disputed land, contended it was subject to a covenant to keep it as an open space under the Open Spaces Act 1906. Respondent had lodged Land Registry form NAP but failed to require the matter to be dealt with under Schedule 6 paragraph. 5 conditions. Applicants alleged that adverse possession commenced in the 1980s. Respondent denied this and also claimed that because the land was open space subject to certain bylaws, this rendered Applicant’s activities unlawful and therefore incapable of supporting the claim, seeking to distinguish Best v Chief Land Registrar [2015] EWCA (Civ) 17. HELD that Applicant’s statutory declaration in support of the application was inconsistent with their evidence in a previous case concerning adjoining land and the differences could not be adequately explained. Applicant’s evidence therefore not accepted and it was found that adverse possession (if any )had commenced no earlier than 2016/2017. The Best point did not have to be decided. |
| Download decision(s) | [2019] UKFTT 593 (PC) |
