(1) Pye [2007]: the ECHR has finally ruled that the 12-year limitation period (Limitation Act 1980) is not a piece of legislation that breaches a landowner’s human rights. Thus, the dispossessed landowner cannot claim damages from the government on the basis that LA 1980 is not compliant with human rights.

(2) Beaulane [2005]: the High Court ruled that for a squatter to be able to claim adverse possession, he must show that his use of the land was inconsistent with the use of the land by the owner (ie not merely that it was without the owner’s consent – as was previously the law). This has made it more difficult to claim adverse possession.

(3) LRA 2002: this introduced a new regime for registered land as from 13 October 2003 (in particular, a ten-year period).

Putting all of these changes together (and, in particular, the recent ECHR decision in Pye) means we can now summarise the position as follows:

• 12 years’ adverse possession of registered or unregistered land, completed before 2 October 2000: this is the Pye situation. Accordingly, HRA 1998 does not apply; further challenges to the law in relation to unregistered land are now unlikely to succeed.
• 12 years’ adverse possession of registered land, completed on or after 2 October 2000 but before 13 October 2003: this is the Beaulane situation. HRA 1998 does apply, but the new adverse possession regime of LRA 2002 will not apply. Note that because of the Beaulane decision, a squatter must show use that is inconsistent with the use by the owner. See LR Practice Guide 5.
• 12 years’ adverse possession of unregistered land, completed on or after 2 October 2000: HRA 1998 applies. Beaulane will apply, but further challenges to the law on unregistered land are unlikely to succeed (in the light of Pye).
• 12 years’ adverse possession of registered land that was not completed before 13 October 2003: the new regime under LRA 2002 applies. This is generally accepted to be HRA 1998 compliant (and so no human rights challenge is likely to succeed).

For a fuller discussion see excellent article by Cobbetts in [2007] The In-House Lawyer November p99.  © Practical Lawyer