Wilson and Another v Martin's Exors

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Year1992
Date1992
CourtCourt of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
13 cases
  • R Best v The Chief Land Registrar The Secretary of State for Justice (Interested Party)
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 21 January 2015
    ...acquired thereby rights by prescription); Red House Farms (Thorndon) v Catchpole [1977] 2 EGLR 125, CA; Wilson v Martin's Executors [1993] 1 EGLR 178, CA; Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Lambeth v Blackburn [2001] EWCA Civ 912; (2001) 82 P & CR 39 (in which the acts held to be ......
  • Lau Wing Hong And Others v Wong Wor Hung And Another
    • Hong Kong
    • High Court (Hong Kong)
    • 20 September 2006
    ...who is not the true owner and is in possession of the land in the assumed character of the owner.” 27. See too: Wilson v Martin's Exors [1993] 1 EGLR 178, 181 C (CA) where Ralph Gibson LJ emphasised “The concept of adverse possession is that of a landowner who fails to take legal action to ......
  • Prudential Assurance Company Ltd v Waterloo Real Estate Inc.
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 22 January 1999
    ...disagree with the judge. That would be inconsistent with the approach of the Court of Appeal in Wilson v Martin's ExecutorsUNK ([1993] 1 EGLR 178). Mr Purchas submitted that it was only when the conduct of the claimant was equivocal that the requirement to make plain the claimant's intentio......
  • The Prudential Assurance Company Ltd (Plaintiff/Appellant) v Waterloo Real Estate Inc.
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 22 January 1999
    ...judge. As Mr. Bowles rightly pointed out, that would be inconsistent with the approach of this court in Wilson v Martin's Executors [1993] 1 E.G.L.R. 178. Mr. Purchas Q.C. for Waterloo submitted that it is only when the conduct of the claimant is equivocal that the requirement to make plain......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT