Squatters’ rights under threat
The long-established concept of “squatters’ rights” could be under threat from a recent ruling by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), according to a property law expert at MFG Solicitors.
Sarah Denney-Richards said that it has long been accepted that someone who occupies land without the landowner’s permission could over time claim title to the land.
But the recent decision of J A Pye (Oxford) Limited v Graham has cast doubt on that principle and has provided an opportunity for debate over whether the UK Government should face claims for compensation from landowners who have lost property through someone claiming “squatters’ rights”.
The Grahams occupied land owned by Pye under a grazing licence which expired in December 1983. After 1983 the Grahams continued to occupy and graze the land without agreement.
In 1997 the Grahams claimed title to the land through adverse possession. The House of Lords held that the Grahams did have the necessary possession of the land and awarded them title.
Following the House of Lords’ decision, Pye made a claim to the ECHR and argued that while the Grahams were the people who had occupied the land and claimed title to it, it was the Government who should ultimately be held accountable. If the Government had not passed the Limitation Act there would be no law permitting adverse possession and consequently the Grahams would have no right to the land.
The Court ruled in Pye’s favour and held that the Limitation Act was in breach of Article 1 of the 1st Protocol of the European Convention of Human Rights.
The Court concluded that depriving Pye of title to its registered land “imposed on them an excessive burden and upset the fair balance between the demands of the public interest on the one hand and [Pye’s] right to the peaceful enjoyment of their possessions on the other”.
The Court is yet to decide whether compensation should be payable by the Government to landowners who have lost property due to successful adverse possession claims in the past. In the case of Pye the land was prime development land and was worth in excess of £10 million.
Sarah Denney-Richards said: “The decision in Pye v Graham also highlights the importance of registering title to land."
“First, the relatively new Land Registration Act 2002 provides greater protection for landowners of registered land against squatters. It provides for a new procedure where anyone claiming adverse possession through an application to the Land Registry will trigger a notice to the owner of the land who is then given the opportunity to object.”
“Secondly, where in the past it has been possible to register a caution on your own unregistered land so that the Land Registry notifies you if a squatter applies for first registration, after October 2005 this right was removed. "
“This recent decision is likely to have real consequences for existing and future claims to adverse possession in this country. Are we seeing the beginning of the end of 180 years of established law in this area? Only time will tell.”
