Criminal Squatting: Evaluating the Application of ‘Ex Turpi Causa Non Oritur Actio’ on Adverse Possession Claims under LRA 2002

Abstract

The article focus on the law of adverse possession (AP) under Land Registration Act (LRA) 2002 which has transformed the fundamental basis of entitlement of land from possession to registration. A detail analysis of the law of adverse possession will follow, concentrating on a comparison between the former and the current adverse possession scheme governed by the LRA 2002. This article will evaluate the protection of registered proprietors by reviewing the statutory and case law.  The LRA 2002 has made it difficult for adverse possessors to have a successful claim. The position of legal proprietor is further strengthened by the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act (LASPO) 2012, which has created a new offence of criminal. With the incorporation of LAPSO 2012, the maxim ‘ex turpi causa non oritur actio’ will be appraised in light of the recent case law including Rashid v Nasrullah [2018] and R (Best) v The Chief Land Registrar [2015].  In light of the findings, the issues detailed, this article will argue that the holistic interpretation of ‘ex turpi causa’ maxim ensures a balance between the goals of adverse possession claims. The true owners have a more favorable position under the new regime, as it provides more cohesive rules for protection by focusing on the registered title compared to mere possession; thereby bring law in conformity with the policy considerations of the current era.

Keywords: Adverse Possession, Land Registration Act 2002 (LRA 2002), Ex Turpi Causa Non Oritur Actio, Registered Proprietors, Legal Ownership, Criminal Squatting, Land Law, Property Rights