Out with the Owners: The Eurasian Sequels to J A Pye (Oxford) Ltd v. United Kingdom

Civil Justice Quarterly, Vol. 27, pp. 260-276, 2008

18 Pages Posted: 6 Oct 2010 Last revised: 25 Feb 2011

Oliver Jones

Seven Wentworth Chambers

Date Written: April 1, 2008

Abstract

This article critically analyses the judgment of the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights in J A Pye (Oxford) Ltd v United Kingdom (2006) 43 EHRR 3. It criticises the Court's conclusion that the right to property is engaged by the English law of adverse possession. That law is a limit applicable as part of the general law form the moment title is required. As such, it cannot be expanded by the right to property under the European Convention. The author explains how the position is different in relation to adverse possession in Hong Kong and Art 105 of the Hong Kong Basic Law, as recently examined in Harvest Good Development Ltd v Secretary for Justice [2007] 4 HKC 1.

Keywords: land law, adverse possession, human rights, right to property, European Convention, Hong Kong Basic Law

Suggested Citation

Jones, Oliver, Out with the Owners: The Eurasian Sequels to J A Pye (Oxford) Ltd v. United Kingdom (April 1, 2008). Civil Justice Quarterly, Vol. 27, pp. 260-276, 2008. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1688188

Oliver Jones (Contact Author)

Seven Wentworth Chambers ( email )

7th Floor, 180 Phillip Street
Sydney, 2000
United States

Paper statistics

Downloads
354
Rank
65,919
Abstract Views
1,733