Brown v Ridley: the Supreme Court clarifies the ‘ten year’ rule of adverse possession

Lucy Parkhouse, solicitor, and Luke Holden, senior associate solicitor, in our land and property dispute resolution team, look at the recent Brown V Ridley case and the clarification of the ten-year requirement in adverse possession claims

The Supreme Court’s unanimous judgment in Brown v Ridley will significantly impact those seeking to claim land through adverse possession and landowners looking to defend their registered titles.

Background of adverse possession and the ten-year rule

If a person or company has owned land continuously for ten years, they may apply to be recognised as the land’s legal owner under Schedule six of the Land Registration Act 2002 (“LRA 2002”).  Pursuant to paragraph 5(4) of the LRA 2002, the applicant must have had a ‘reasonable belief’ that the land belonged to them for at least ten years prior to the application date.

Prior to Brown v. Ridley, paragraph 5(4)(c) was typically read by the court to suggest that the ten-year period of reasonable belief had to continue up until the date of the application.  This interpretation presented difficulties for applicants who had owned the land for more than ten years but had recently learned of its true legal title.

Brown v Ridley

The case concerned a strip of land in County Durham that was next to the Ridleys’ property.  Since buying their property in 2004, the Ridleys used, maintained and treated the land as their own.  In 2018, the Ridleys learnt that Mr. Brown was the legal owner of the land, having purchased it in 2002.

The Ridleys claimed to have had possession of the land for fifteen years, and to have had a reasonable belief that it was theirs for at least ten years when they applied to the Land Registry for adverse possession in 2019.

A key issue for the Supreme Court was the interpretation of paragraph 5(4)(c) –  whether the ten years of reasonable belief had to have elapsed on the date the application for adverse possession was made or if it could have happened at any point during the applicant’s possession.

The Supreme Court’s decision

The Supreme Court ruled that the ten-year period of reasonable belief does not necessarily have to extend up to the application date.  Instead, as long as the applicant can demonstrate a continuous ten-year period of reasonable belief within the overall period of adverse possession, the application can succeed.

This decision departs from previous case law, which required applicants to show reasonable belief for the entire ten years up to the date of the application.  Lord Briggs remarked that:

“…the general intent to confine adverse possession is largely achieved by sub-paras (a) and (b) of para 5(4), which limit the use of adverse possession, unaccompanied by some other right, to cases about boundaries which are not defined by the register.  There is therefore little left in the submissions that the reasonable belief condition needs also to be narrowly construed”.

The Supreme Court acknowledged that once an individual becomes aware they do not own the land, it would be unreasonable to expect them to continue holding that belief until the application date.  The ruling allows for greater flexibility by recognising past periods of reasonable belief, provided the applicant acts promptly upon discovering the land’s true ownership.

Implications in practice

The judgment provides greater flexibility for applicants seeking adverse possession of land.  Individuals who have occupied land under the belief that it was theirs can now rely on any ten-year period within their overall possession, rather than the immediate ten years before their application.

However, prompt action from a potential application is essential.  Once an applicant becomes aware that they are not the legal owner, they must act swiftly to submit their application to the Land Registry.  Delaying the application after cessation of their reasonable belief in ownership may weaken the application.

The judgment also highlights the importance of landowners proactively monitoring their land, and resolving any boundary uncertainties under section 60 of the LRA 2002 to prevent long-term occupation by a neighbour or third party leading to costly adverse possession claims.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v Ridley marks a significant clarification of the ten-year requirement in adverse possession claims.  By permitting applicants to rely on any ten-year period of reasonable belief, the ruling aids adverse possession in cases where the applicant became aware of the true ownership shortly before applying.

This case underscores the importance of timely action and legal advice in boundary disputes for landowners and adverse possession applicants alike.

Consulting a specialist property disputes solicitor is essential for advice on adverse possession, whether you are an applicant seeking possession, or a landowner objecting to an application.

If you would like to speak with one of our lawyers, then please get in touch with our land & property dispute resolution team on 01772 258321.