Chapter 4 Self-test questions

. What is regarded as the fundamental basis and justification for the informal acquisition of title on the grounds of adverse possession? Select one of the following.

Cost–benefit analysis

Long user

Fairness and Justice

Free alienability of land

. Which one of the following statements is incorrect as regards the law of adverse possession?

The starting point of adverse possession is a 'wrong'; namely, the sanctioning of trespass or squatting.

The starting point of adverse possession is a 'societal good'; namely, a principle designed to facilitate dealings with land.

Howard and Hill (1995) argue that adverse possession cannot be justified on the basis of long user.

The Law Commission in its Report No. 254, Land Registration for the Twenty-First Century: A Consultative Document (1998) noted that it was remarkable that adverse possession is tantamount to a sanctioning of land theft.

. Which one of the following is not regarded as a justification for the law of adverse possession?

Adverse possession can be justified as an aspect of the law on limitation of actions by protected defendants from stale claims and encouraging claimants not to sleep on their rights.

Adverse possession can be justified as keeping land ownership and the reality of possession of land inline and instep.

Adverse possession can be justified as an example of the 'relativity of title' principle.

Adverse possession can be justified as an aspect of freedom to contract.

. The Law Commission regards as 'the strongest justification' of adverse possession the principle of 'relativity of title'—but what does this mean? Select one of the following.

Relativity of title is a concept introduced in the LRA 2002 and concerns overriding interests.

Relativity of title signifies that title is relative, never absolute and depends ultimately on possession and who can assert the best claim to land.

Relativity of title refers to the need to balance the interests of landowners and third parties.

Relativity of title builds on the concept of the 'Deserted Wife's Equity' as developed by Lord Denning.

. Complete this quotation from Gray & Gray exploring the law of adverse possession: 'Adverse possession … stems from a historical fixation of property law on ___ .' Select one of the following.

Feudalism

Factual possession of land

Administration of justice

Land theft

. Which one of the following is not a requirement for establishing a claim to adverse possession?

There must be factual possession of the land.

There must be an intention to possess the land.

The original landowner must have ceased possession or have been dispossessed of the land.

The adverse possession must be unreasonable to the original landowner.

. Which one of the following is not relevant to an assessment of 'factual possession' for the purposes of adverse possession?

Factual possession depends on the nature and character of the land in questions.

Factual possession must be exclusive.

Factual possession must be adverse.

Factual possession must be concealed from the landowner.

. Which statutory provision provides that registration of a land charge amounts to actual notice of the interest and will bind anyone coming to the land over which that land charge operates? Select one of the following.

Pye v Graham (2002)

Powell v McFarlane (1979)

Zarb v Parry (2011)

Thorpe v Frank (2019)

. What contribution does the recent case of Rashid v Nasrullah (2019) make to the law of adverse possession? Select one of the following.

Rashid overrules Pye v Graham on the need for factual possession of land.

Rashid removed the requirement for intention to possess from the law of adverse possession.

Rashid confirms that you cannot be in adverse possession of land of which you are the registered proprietor.

Rashid confirms that you can be in adverse possession of land of which you are the registered proprietor.

. In addition to factual possession, there must be evidence of intention to possess the land but what does intention to possess entail? Select one of the following.

Intention to possess requires the claimant to demonstrate an intention to own the land.

Intention to possess requires the claimant to demonstrate an intention to dispossess the landowner.

Intention to possess requires the claimant to demonstrate an intention to possess the land until their death.

Intention to possess requires the clamant to demonstrate an intention to possess the land for herself, to the exclusion of others for her own benefit.

. It is not possible to terminate or interrupt a period of adverse possession. True or false?

True

False

. Adverse possession is brought to an end and the continuity of that adverse possession broken if the adverse possessor ceases possession. True or false?

True

False

. What does the case of Zarb v Parry (2011) tell us about dispossession of the adverse possessor by the true landowner as a terminating event for adverse possession? Select one of the following.

Adverse possession cannot be terminated through dispossession by the true owner.

Adverse possession can only be terminated through dispossession by the true owner.

Merely preparatory acts will not amount to dispossession by the true owner.

Relatively minor acts will suffice as dispossession by the true owner.

. The issuing of possession proceedings is not of itself enough to terminate a period of adverse possession. True or false?

True

False

. A period of adverse possession is terminated or interrupted if there is acknowledgement of the landowner's title by the adverse possessor. As regards acknowledgement of the landowner's title, which one of the following is incorrect?

Acknowledgement of the landowner's title must be in writing and signed by the adverse possessor to be effective.

The court will construe any piece of writing in all the circumstances to determine if it amounts to an acknowledgement of the landowner's title.

Without Prejudice correspondence will not constitute an acknowledgement of title.

The court in Ofulue v Bossert (2008) held that statements in court pleadings are incapable of constituting an acknowledgement of title.

. Today, in light of the enactment of the LRA 2002, claims of adverse possession are more likely to succeed in registered land than in unregistered land. True or false?

True

False

. As regards adverse possession claims in unregistered land, which one of the following is correct?

An adverse possessor must be able to demonstrate eight years continuous unbroken possession to succeed in her claim.

An adverse possessor must be able to demonstrate ten years continuous unbroken possession to succeed in her claim.

An adverse possessor must be able to demonstrate 12 years continuous unbroken possession to succeed in her claim.

An adverse possessor must be able to demonstrate 14 years continuous unbroken possession to succeed in her claim.

. In unregistered land, provided there is no break in the chain of possession, it is possible for the required 12-year period of adverse possession to be accrued by more than one person. True or false?

True

False

. The LRA 2002 introduced a new regime for adverse possession in registered land. Which one of the following is incorrect?

An adverse possessor wishing to acquire title must first make an application to Land Registry be registered as the new proprietor.

Once an application is made, the Registrar will give notice of the adverse possessor's application to the existing proprietor of any registered charge on the estate and any other parties listed in Sch. 6, para. 2(1).

In responding to the notice of the application, the existing registered proprietor can either consent to the application, serve a counter-notice, object, or do nothing.

If the existing registered proprietor does nothing, the adverse possessor will be registered as the new proprietor after a 28-business-day period has elapsed.

. As to the impact of the new regime for adverse possession under Sch. 6 of the LRA 2002, which one of the following statements is incorrect?

Bogusz has argued that Sch. 6 of the LRA 2002 fails to live up to the Law Commission's ambition to reflect the important commercial and economic reality of land in the twenty-first century.

Cooke has argued that the effect of Sch. 6 of the LRA 2002 is to render registered land 'virtually squatter proof'.

Cobb and Fox have argued that Sch. 6 of the LRA 2002 incentivizes those owning unregistered land to register their title to gain the protections of the new regime.

Dixon has argued that Sch. 6 of the LRA 2002 amounts to an 'emasculation of adverse possession'.

. In which case did the court consider whether the law of adverse possession was human rights-compliant? Select one of the following.

Pye v Graham (2002)

Powell v McFarlane (1979)

Buckinghamshire CC v Moran (1990

Rashid v Nasrullah (2019)

. How might human rights arguments be engaged in an adverse possession case? Select one of the following.

Human rights might be engaged as adverse possession always involves public authorities.

Human rights might be engaged as adverse possession strips land owners of their property.

Human rights might be engaged on the basis of inhumane and degrading treatment.

Human rights might be engaged on the basis of discrimination.

. When the case of Pye reached the Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights, how many judges heard the case? Select one of the following.

Three

Five

Seven

Nine

. What was the finding of the Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights in Pye v UK (2008)? Select one of the following.

By four judges to three, the deprivation of property as a result of adverse possession infringed Art. 1 of Protocol 1 of the ECHR.

By six judges to one, the deprivation of property as a result of adverse possession infringed Art. 1 of Protocol 1 of the ECHR.

By four judges to three, adverse possession did not infringe Art. 1 of Protocol 1 of the ECHR.

By six judges to one, adverse possession did not infringe Art. 1 of Protocol 1 of the ECHR.

. On appeal to the Grand Chamber of the European Court, what did the 17 judges decide? Select one of the following.

Article 1 of Protocol 1 was not engaged.

Article 1 of Protocol 1 was engaged but the law of adverse possession struck a fair balance between the rights of individuals and the public interest.

Article 1 of Protocol 1 was engaged and the law of adverse possession was incompatible with the ECHR.

The Grand Chamber was unable to reach a decision.

Quiz Content