adam owns a large estate

it is registered land. disused cottage on it. In 1990 someone move sin and starts work

tim starts renovating it and making it his home in 1990.

fence ip to keep chickens in in 1993.

Lisa moves in. Tim dies in 2000 leaving all his wordly goods to her.

does she own it? Adverse possession?

=============

The cottage iis disused so what amount of phyiscal acitivty makes for actual pccupation? Is factual possession the same as exclusive possession? Poweel v Macfarlane suggests it is and so does Bucks CC v Moran; Marsden v Miller

Pye v Graham and over staying licensee suucceeded in getting to keep the land.

One must establish when the intention to exclusively possess existed.

Physical work did not beging till 1995. This might not still mean facutal possession. overnght stays wer eonly wvey so foten. adverse possession probably did not begin till 1991 earloest

Factual possession maybe began in 1995. fencing is to keep chickens in or others out? That a=matters. Probably fencing makes for adverse possession re Inglewood v Baker

A landlord did not object. It could still be adverse possession despite this. Limitation Act 1980

Lisa’s irghts take over from Tim. she has been adversely possessing in her own right even without Tim;s will

Would Lisa be able to take adavnateg of the time Tim possessed before she came along

============

ERRORS

Many people wrongly assumed adverse possession began in 1990 – forst date mentioned.

A good candidate will look at LRA 2002 and the old act. A candidate should express a view on whether the law is fair.

A bad answer does not notice 1991 as beiing important . bad answers think this is about proprietary estoppel.

=================

adverse possession four requirments

factual possession

possession must be open, adverse and exclusive

squattter must have intended to posses sthe land

must be for over 12 years

must fulfill requirmenets of 2002 LRA

Bucks CC v Moran – factual possession is assessed contextually

Prudential assurance v Waterloo – refurbshing a house was factual possession

Seddn v Smith – mending fences was factual possession

Purbirck v Hackeny – trivial acts can mean factual possession

possession myst be open. ppossesser must ufnrul his flag

there must e intedn to posses against all others with better title

there are different rules in regsterd oor unreguserd land. 1991 is significant

If Lia was told by Adam that she did nt mind her using the land whilst he sought finance this would be different. That would be acknowledgement of title. If Lisa threw out her boyfriend that would end adverse possession

========

Apply law to the facts. do not write everything you know

do not conider alterative facts before the ones given.

improving law on leases

Ample scope for improvement and simplification. How far do you agree with assessment of (a) essential legal characteristics needed to create a lease and (b) the legal principles relating to forfeiture for breach of a leasehold covenant other than one for a payment of rent/

======================

You can argue that these need to be improved and simplified or not. doo not say what a lease is. A lease has certainty of term, rent , exclusive possession and formalities. Law of Property Act 1925,

Exclusive possession – street  v mountford, antoniades v villiers, ag securities v vaughan, mkeover v brady

certain term – prudential v LRB, berrisford  mexfield.

rent – ashburn anstalt v arnold

forfeiture  –  Law of properyt act.  Billson v residential apartments, expert clothing v hillgate

a good answer will look at bith parts sepeately. you need a reasonef argument. do not just splrueg all you know about lease.

===============

How to do questions on easements, leases, beneficial interest etc….

This is about Jake purchasing Whiteacre from Geoffrey. Jake does the conveyancing work. Moves in. land regstere in his name,

===================

Land Registration Act 2002 will determined wheher easements and lease are binding on a purchaser.

certain unregistered interests ccan override.

Larry’s lease is a grant – by deed and for under 7 years. It is therefore overriding nd does not need to be registered. It is a legal lease. Land Registraction act schedule 3 para 1.

Mp’s right could be a lease, licence or easement. It is likely to be an easement. It registered it is binding. If not – not. A registered reasement is legal. An unregistered one is equitable  even if conveyed by deed.

If equitable it would nneed to be protected by notice in order to bind. Yavuz v Chauhury is a case here.

This easeent mihjt be impiedly created .

schedule 3 para 3 has no application to expressly created easements.

expressly created legal easements are binding because they are registered.

The woman may have a beneificial interest in the house. Therre is a lot of case law on this.

you need to look at who woud be prioritised in each case.

some legal rights would automatically bind Jake. Mo ciuld protect himself through registering his rights.

Kitty may get an application of constructive trust. By paying only Godfry her interest wll not have been overreached..

===================================

COMMON ERRORS.

SOme people do not realise this is about prioities in registere and unregisterd land., A lease has been granted there is no need to doscuss whether ot has been grnted.  The facts do not need to be discussed

dooes the legal lease bind Jake? That is what neds to be decided.

Kitty has a constructive trust or a resulting trust. It needs to be decided which. You need to find it is bind the purhaser  and if so how. No need to wuanitfy her share

Then Mo – easement. Does that bind Jake?

You need to know about unregistered conveyancing.

a BAD anwer will be about formalities and go over the facts too mch.

==============

========================================