000			01982cam a2200253 4500
001			ABS64050
008			000000n2001 000 0 eng u
035			_a(Sirsi) u112819
245			_aJA Pye (Oxford) Ltd and another v Graham and another
260			_c2001
490			_aEstates Gazette _v[2001] 18 EG 176-183(8)
520			_aCA 6 February 2001. Appellants J acquired an area of farmland containing the disputed land, with the intention of holding the disputed land until planning permission could be obtained for development. J made a succession of arrangements relating to the disputed land with defendants G who owned the adjoining property, and between 1986 and 1999 G grazed, maintained and fertilised the disputed land. J acquired the disputed land by transfer in 1985, and applied for possession of land to recover the land from G who had claimed adverse possession. The court held that G had established intention to possess and rejected J's claim for possession. J appealed. Appeal allowed; G did not demonstrate the required intention to possess and no adverse possession took place. Moreover, the European Convention on Human Rights First Protocol Article 1 does not impinge upon the Limitation Act 1980 and the acquisition of title by adverse possession. Copy of judgement available on http://porch.ccta.gov.uk/courtser/judgements.nsf/6ff876ba66f8361a8025683c00411386/1214f9677599f6fd80256a24003f2c86?OpenDocument
590			_aABS
650			_aADVERSE POSSESSION
650			_aLAND OWNERSHIP
650			_aPOSSESSION
650			_aLIMITATION ACT 1980
650			_aJA PYE (OXFORD) LTD V GRAHAM
650			_aCONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS FIRST PROTOCOL ART 1
650			_aHUMAN RIGHTS ACT 1998
690			_aPROPERTY AND LAND LAW-CASE LAW
856			_uhttps://porch.ccta.gov.uk/courtser/judgements.nsf/6ff876ba66f8361a8025683c00411386/1214f9677599f6fd80256a24003f2c86?OpenDocument
942			_n0
999			_c67164 _d67164