 My name is Amy Gawnmore and I'm one of theengers in the Law Faculty and one of the subjects I teach is land law and in particular adverse possession the law relating to squatters. Now in these three videos we're going to explore some further issues relating to squatters' rights. Now you have been asked to consider whether there are any arguments for and against the law of adverse possession, the idea that a squatter somebody on somebody else's land, without permission, is able to become the owner of it after they useув pesolaeth Ieithio i'r gweithio, i'r ffordd yw'r ysgol, a'r eu bod yn y lle o'r byd yn ymddangos yn dda. Felly nid o'n dweud o gweithio'r gweithio ar y cyfnodau ar y law ffordd yma, ac rwy'n gweithio'n gweithio'n gweithio'r reidwyr i'r ysgol yw'r ysgol ar y dyfodol. Rwy'n gweithio'n gweithio Harry Hallows, sy'n gweithio'n gweithio'r Hamster Dheith. mae'n rhaid o'r Blackburn yw'r cynyddu a'r honno i ymddangos o'r cyfrwyngol o hyn ymddangos y Llywodraeth? Ieithio'r cyfrwyngol mae'n cyfrwyngol yn gallu ymddangos ynghylch am ddangos o'r cyfrwyngol yn Llywodraeth fel ymddangos, ac yn fwy o gael yn y llan yma i'ch gael eu cyfrwyngol. Mae'r cyfeirio, mae'n ddiddorol, mae'n ddiddorol o'r cyfrwyngol yma, oedd yn ymddangos cyfrwyngol i ddiddorol o'r cyfrwyngol. person's property. So this could be one of the arguments against the law of adverse possession, the idea that it goes against the grain to allow people to become property owners without necessarily paying for it. Let's look at the other side of the coin. Are there any justifications for the law of adverse possession? Well I'm going to consider five possible rationales for the law. Now the first rationale is quite technical but it's important. The law of adverse possession can actually help us as a society work out who actually owns a particular plot of land. Now to understand why we need to go on a bit of a diversion, let's imagine that you want to buy a house and let's imagine you want to buy a house from somebody called David. So he's offering to sell you the house before you buy you want to be certain that David owns that particular plot. Now one way of being certain that he owns that plot is that sometimes ownership of land is recorded in a public land register, the land register. But let's imagine that David's plot is not recorded in the public land register. How can you be sure that he's the owner? Well he might come back to you and say well I bought it from another person, let's call that person Catherine. So how can you then be sure that Catherine was the owner when she sold it to David? Well you can only be sure that Catherine was the owner if she bought it from the owner and you have to go back and back and back in order to be sure that the person you're buying from is actually the owner of the land. Now it's really important that we know who owns land because buying and selling land depends on people having confidence that they're buying from the proper owner. It's important for the economy that people know that they are buying from the proper owner. So where does the law of adverse possession come into all of this? Well if you know that somebody has been adversely possessing land for a sufficiently long period of time the law says that they are the owner of that piece of land and suddenly we have the answer to the question who owns a particular plot of land so that purchasers could be confident in buying it. So where there's an evidential uncertainty as to who owns land adverse possession can be very very important in providing the answer. So that's the first reason why we might have a law of adverse possession. Another reason is based on the idea that in order for a legal system to function it needs to be in touch with reality. Now let's imagine that I'm the legal owner of a plot of land but somebody else has been living on it as if they are the owner for the last 20 years. Here the law says one thing that I'm the owner but in fact everybody else is going to think that the person living there is the owner. The law is out of touch with reality and arguably there is an important concern in making the law match up with reality and adverse possession can do that by saying that if you're living on land for a long period of time you can become the owner. The third rationale for adverse possession is based on the idea that arguably we should be giving rights to those who use land rather than those who sit on their rights to land. Now this is important because in England land is a finite natural resource. We need to make good use of it. Now to give you some statistics around three percent of homes in England are currently empty and that's over 600 000. Arguably these homes should be being put to good use. Now if people are aware of the law of adverse possession they will realise that if they don't use their land and somebody else does they will lose their rights. So this rationale is based on a use it or lose it theory. Now the fourth possible rationale for adverse possession is based on a labour dessert theory. Now this is a theory created by the philosopher John Locke who argued that those who work with and engage with property should be entitled to it. So if you work and live on property you deserve some entitlement to the land. The final possible rationale for adverse possession is more psychological and this is based on the idea that if you live on land make it your home you build up a psychological connection with that property and arguably the law has some function in respecting the psychological connection you have made with that land and I'm sure that you've got some possessions that you've had for a long time that you've built up some kind of psychological or emotional attachment to it and this rationale could explain part of the law of adverse possession. So the big question for all of us as land lawyers is whether these five rationales for the law of adverse possession together add up to a compelling case which actually justifies giving squatters ownership rights over somebody else's land.