Weekly review: 18th – 22nd March 2013

Adverse possession: possession

There is no adverse possession where there is insufficient evidence of possession itself (Tang Ching v Wu Wan Yau)

Leases: essential elements

When seeking to argue that an agreement (perhaps disguised as a partnership or employment agreement) gives rise to a lease, the would-be tenant must identify and prove the demised premises, the term and the intention to create a lease with the necessary degree of certainty and on the balance of probabilities (Chau Yu v Kwan Chuen Kuen (No 2))

Leases: exclusive possession

There is  no exclusive possession where the purposes underlying the agreement could not be achieved if the occupier had exclusive possession nor wherethe restrictions imposed on the occupier are incompatible with exclusive possession (Westminster City Council v Clarke)


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: