• Send us a message

    Fill in our form and we'll get back to you as soon as possible

    Please enter name
    Please enter your telephone number
    Please enter your email address
    Please let us know which of offices would most convenient for you?
    Please enter the details of your enquiry
    Please enter the verification code
    Send us a message
  • Services for you
  • Services for business

Property Dispute Delays Estate Administration

Disputes over strips of property are common, and a typical result is that the resolution of the dispute costs many times the value of the land in dispute.

This can cause particular problems when an estate is involved, as the executor is faced with potential costs and delay in administering the estate.

A case of this kind was eventually decided in January 2016, nearly three years after the death of the property owner.

The area in dispute was an old and overgrown access road that divided two pieces of property, one of which was owned by a farmer who died in 2013. In 2009, the farmer had applied for planning permission to build a poultry shed on his farm and the works were substantially completed in 2010.

During the work, spoil was deposited on the strip of land and damage was done to the neighbouring farmer's wall. The correspondence which followed on from that led eventually to a court case to decide the ownership of the strip.

The land had originally been common land. The High Court found that the evidence of the witnesses generally had to be 'treated with a pinch of salt' and the judge had to refer back to documents dating from the early 1800s.

The executor of the estate also claimed that his late father had a good title to the land based on the law of adverse possession ('squatters' rights'), which allows a person who has had unfettered and open possession of land to take legal title to it provided the necessary criteria are met.

After a judgment that ran to 92 paragraphs, the Court ruled that the adverse possession claim failed and that the strip was in the ownership of both parties, divided down the middle.

The contents of this article are intended for general information purposes only and shall not be deemed to be, or constitute legal advice. We cannot accept responsibility for any loss as a result of acts or omissions taken in respect of this article.