Prudential Assurance Co Limited v Waterloo Real Estate Inc

Case Summary

 

Court:
Court of Appeal
Status:
Binding
Current Legislation:
Party Wall etc. Act 1996, s. 20
Facts:

A 30 metre party wall sat equally astride land owned by Prudential and land owned by Waterloo.7 metres of this wall formed the flank wall of the Normandie Hotel on Waterloo’s land. A smaller portion of that stretch also formed the flank wall of a pub on Prudential’s land called the Pakenham Tavern. The Pakenham was demolished in 1957.

Since then the owners of Waterloo’s land had treated the wall as their own. They had cleaned it, repaired it, maintained it, and granted leases to their tenants including repairing covenants relating to the wall.

Waterloo claimed adverse possession of the whole wall.

Decision:

Waterloo’s conduct in respect of the wall clearly demonstrated the necessary intention to possess the wall. They had therefore acquired adverse possession of the whole wall.

Comment:

This case¬†was decided under the “old” system of adverse possession. if part of the period of possession relied upon is after 13 October 2003 then the situation may fall under the “new” system.