Elizabeth Roseanne Dobson & Anor v Alison Unsted & Anor

Decision date: 2 March 2026

Neutral citation: [2026] UKUT 93 (LC)

Overall AI summary confidence: medium

AI Notice: Any short overview, ratio decidendi summary or obiter dicta summary shown on this page is AI-generated, provided only to help users assess potential relevance more quickly, and may be wholly inaccurate. No liability is accepted for the accuracy of any such summary, regardless of any AI confidence rating shown. Users should check the underlying decision and obtain appropriate legal advice rather than relying on any summary.

Short overview

This short overview is intended to summarise the case, issues and outcome so far as they are supported by the judgment.

AI confidence in this short overview: medium

This Upper Tribunal appeal concerns a tiny triangular strip of land between 27 and 29 Pointers Hill and whether the appellants (or their predecessors) had the factual possession and intention to possess it for the ten‑year common‑law period prior to 2018. The First‑tier Tribunal found adverse possession only from 2018 when the area became a planted flower bed, rejecting earlier claims based on intermittent mowing and maintenance. Permission to appeal was granted on the narrow ground that the FTT may have erred about possession before 2018; the dispute over Schedule 6 was not decisive because paragraph 5(c) was accepted.

Ratio decidendi

This summary is intended to identify the ratio decidendi, meaning the legal reasons for deciding and the binding part of the decision.

AI confidence in this ratio decidendi summary: medium

Factual possession must be assessed by reference to the nature and sensible use of the particular land: acts sufficient to constitute possession on one type of land may be insufficient on another. Possession requires exclusive, obvious and unequivocal control such that a reasonably informed owner would understand an occupier was asserting possession; routine maintenance of an open lawn can amount to possession but whether specific acts suffice depends on their character and context.

Obiter dicta

This summary is intended to identify obiter dicta, meaning observations made by the way that were not necessary to deciding the case and are not binding.

AI confidence in this obiter dicta summary: medium

The Tribunal did not need to resolve Schedule 6 in full because paragraph 5(c) (reasonable belief) was accepted. Historical evidence from multiple occupiers and features such as prior drive layout, setts, mowing and planting are relevant to the factual assessment of possession, but no broader principle on Schedule 6 was established.