Markfield Investments Ltd v Evans
Series: Property and Compensation Reports ; [2001] 81 P&CR 473-478(5)Publication details: 2001Subject(s): Online resources: Summary: CA 9 November 2000. In response to a claim for possession of a property by the appellant (M) in 1999 the respondent (E) claimed to have been in continuous and exclusive possession since 1977, thus barring M's action under the Limitation Act 1990. M claimed that the property was vacant in 1978/79 and argued that a claim for possession brought by M's predecessor in title in 1990 but dismissed for want of prosecution in 1999 stopped 'time running' in favour of E's claim to adverse possession. The CA upheld the CC ruling that the issue of a writ did not prevent 'time running' and dismissed the appeal. Copy of the judgement available at http://porch.ccta.gov.uk/courtser/judgements.nsf/Search/400BA8DD898E8CEF80256992004A4BF4?OpenDocument| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | ABS64186 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 113235-1001 |
CA 9 November 2000. In response to a claim for possession of a property by the appellant (M) in 1999 the respondent (E) claimed to have been in continuous and exclusive possession since 1977, thus barring M's action under the Limitation Act 1990. M claimed that the property was vacant in 1978/79 and argued that a claim for possession brought by M's predecessor in title in 1990 but dismissed for want of prosecution in 1999 stopped 'time running' in favour of E's claim to adverse possession. The CA upheld the CC ruling that the issue of a writ did not prevent 'time running' and dismissed the appeal. Copy of the judgement available at http://porch.ccta.gov.uk/courtser/judgements.nsf/Search/400BA8DD898E8CEF80256992004A4BF4?OpenDocument