Supreme Court Ruling - A Cautionary Tale for Landowners on Adverse Possession

The Supreme Court has issued a ruling in Brown v Ridley that has significant implications for landowners, reinforcing the need for vigilance in monitoring property boundaries.

One of the grounds on which someone can being a claim for adverse possession of registered land is that they occupied the land for at least 10 years and were under a mistaken but reasonable belief that they already owned the land. The question that has been plaguing all applications brought under this particular provision of the Land Registration Act, 2002 (LRA) has been whether the mistaken belief had to be held right up to the time of the application or whether any 10 years’ reasonable belief would be sufficient.

The Supreme Court decision released yesterday (26 Feb 2025) clarifies that any 10 years’ reasonable belief is sufficient. This would mean that occupiers of registered land may still claim registered land by adverse possession years after discovering that their belief about ownership of a particular parcel of land was incorrect as long as they originally held that reasonable but mistaken belief for at least 10 years. This means landowners could face claims long after the correct position as to legal ownership has been pointed out..

Background

The dispute arose over a strip of land (“the disputed land”) between two properties in County Durham. Mr. Brown, the registered owner of one plot, contested an application by his neighbours, Mr. and Mrs. Ridley, who sought to claim ownership through adverse possession.

The Ridleys had used the land as part of their garden and later incorporated it into a new house site. Despite discovering in 2018 that they were not the legal owners, they applied to the Land Registry in 2019 to be registered as proprietors, arguing they had occupied the land for the required period. Mr. Brown objected, leading to a legal battle that reached the Supreme Court.

Supreme Court decision – a warning for property owners

The Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the ten-year period of reasonable belief does not have to be the ten years immediately before an application. Instead, an applicant can rely on any ten-year period within their time of adverse possession, even if they later became aware that the land was not theirs.

Key concerns for landowners

1. Extended risk window – This ruling confirms that an adverse possessor does not need to apply immediately upon losing their mistaken belief. Instead, they may still make a claim many years later, posing an ongoing risk to landowners.
2. Need for diligent boundary management – Landowners must proactively monitor property boundaries and swiftly challenge any encroachments to avoid long-term possession claims.
3. Potential for disputes – The decision may encourage occupiers to delay claims, leading to greater uncertainty and potential legal battles for property owners.
4. No automatic protection under human rights law – The Supreme Court rejected the argument that human rights law should favour the original landowner. This underscores the importance of property owners taking active steps to protect their land.

Practical steps for landowners

• Regularly review and document property boundaries.
• Challenge encroachments early to prevent adverse possession claims from arising.
• Seek legal advice if there is any doubt about boundary ownership.
• Consider formal boundary agreements to prevent disputes.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s ruling in Brown v Ridley is a stark reminder for landowners to remain proactive in protecting their property. The decision opens the door for claims by occupiers who had mistakenly believed they owned land, even if that belief ended long before they applied. To mitigate risks, landowners should take preventative steps now to secure their property rights and avoid unexpected claims in the future.

If you need advice on adverse possession, boundary disputes, or protecting your land, our experts are here to help.