Brown (Respondent) v Ridley and another (Appellants)
(UKSC 2024/0044) - [2025] UKSC 7 Mr Brown (the respondent) is the registered owner of land lying to the west of the Promenade, Consett, County Durham, which he purchased in September 2002 (“the Brown land”). Mr and Mrs Ridley (the appellants) are the registered owners of a neighbouring plot of land, which they purchased in July 2004 (“Valley View”). A previous owner of Valley View had put up a fence and planted a hedge along what he understood to be the boundary between the Brown land and Valley View, but which (as the parties now agree) actually enclosed part of the Brown land as registered (this strip of land being the “disputed land”). The Ridleys used the disputed land first as part of their garden and later as part of the site for the erection of a new house (into which they eventually moved). Planning permission for the new house was granted in early 2018. The fence and hedge were removed later that same year in preparation for the necessary construction work. In October 2019, Mr Brown gave notice to the Ridleys that he considered the construction work to be in breach of the Party Wall etc. Act 1996. In December 2019, the Ridleys applied to the Land Registry to be registered as the owners of the disputed land on the grounds that they had been in adverse possession of it for the requisite period of time per the Land Registration Act 2002. Mr Brown objected to their application. The Land Registry referred the matter to the First-Tier Tribunal, which sided with the Ridleys. Mr Brown appealed, and won in the Upper Tribunal. The Ridleys now appeal to the Supreme Court. The issue is: What is the period of ten years in which an applicant for registration as the owner of land over on the basis of adverse possession must hold the reasonable belief that they were the owner of that land under paragraph 5(4)(c) of Schedule 6 of the Land Registration Act 2002? More information is available on our website

R (Bancoult No 3) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs

Cheshire West Overruled: What the Supreme Court ruling means for Deprivations of Liberty
![For Women Scotland Ltd v The Scottish Ministers [2025] UKSC 16](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/XxHtbTragtg/hqdefault.jpg?sqp=-oaymwEjCNACELwBSFryq4qpAxUIARUAAAAAGAElAADIQj0AgKJDeAE=&rs=AOn4CLC13RQskOOwfknwheXR4Y8ZqSBRHg)
For Women Scotland Ltd v The Scottish Ministers [2025] UKSC 16

'LYING' Sadiq Khan DESTROYED during BRUTAL London Assembly grilling on crime

Female Cop Arrests a Man for Her Own Mistake and Gets FIRED

Lawyer Explains: What To Do If Your Neighbor Is Encroaching On Your Land

Saxon Woods Investments Limited and others v Costa

“Labour Can’t Even Lead a Coup”, Kemi Badenoch Says Prime Minister Is ‘In Office, Not Power’ | AC1G

Webinar - Employment: Fire & Rehire

A Review of Adverse Possession, Trinity Business & Property Silk, Simon Goldberg K.C.

The Kingdom of Bahrain v Shehabi and another

Adverse Possession and Squatters | BlackBeltBarrister

Lord Sumption’s Valedictory Remarks

Supreme Court Ruling on Deprivation of Liberty and Cheshire West 'Acid Test'

Golden Retriever Meets Completely Broken Rescue for the First Time

The Kingdom of Bahrain v Shehabi and another

See How a 453kg Giant Bluefin Tuna Is Flawlessly Carved in Seconds

A practical guide to claiming ownership of registered land by adverse possession

Ames Moot Court Competition 1987
![Commissioners for HM Revenue and Customs v BlueCrest Capital Management (UK) LLP [2026] UKSC 18](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/ZuXy9_HWUuM/hqdefault.jpg?sqp=-oaymwEjCNACELwBSFryq4qpAxUIARUAAAAAGAElAADIQj0AgKJDeAE=&rs=AOn4CLAhkoomsB1BRFR95B4EBlBTiSVk8A)
