000			01545cam a2200229 4500
001			ABS64440
008			010830n2001 000 0 eng u
035			_a(Sirsi) u114390
245			_aBatt and another v Adams
260			_c2001
490			_aEstates Gazette _v[2001] 32 EG 90-96(7)
520			_aCD, 11 May 2001. A dispute over the title of a piece of farmland, also involving an agricultural tenancy. The court had to decide whether the tenant, Higgs (H), was in factual possession of the disputed land and intending to exclude all others including the landlord, Adams. It was decided that H was in factual possession for the necessary 12-year period but the necessary intention to exclude others was not proved, therefore there was no adverse possession. It was also decided that the presumption that upon the determination of a tenancy any possessory title acquired by a tenant passes to his landlord, will not apply between the tenant and third parties (in this case the trustees of Batt (B). If adverse possession had been proved, and if the presumption applied that any title acquired by a tenant would pass to his landlord, then it would pass to H's landlord, Adams Jnr, not Adams Snr. Appeal allowed.
590			_aABS
650			_aADVERSE POSSESSION
650			_aBATT V ADAMS
650			_aDISPUTED POSSESSION
650			_aLANDLORD AND TENANT _96252
650			_aPROPERTY-LANDLORD AND TENANT-TENANCIES-AGRICULTURAL TENANCIES
650			_aPOSSESSORY TITLE
690			_aPROPERTY AND LAND LAW-CASE LAW
942			_n0
999			_c68123 _d68123