" Squatter's Rights " Law Claims !

In the early years of the twentieth century much of Sydney was unsewered.  Those were the days when every home had a brick outhouse in the back garden and this was serviced by the " dunny man ", who called weekly to replace the pan and take away what was termed the " night soil ".

Access was a problem and across many suburbs narrow laneways were created to allow this to be carried out with discretion.   Eventually, the sewer arrived and this network of service laneways fell into disuse, unwanted and forgotten, until this week the issue was decided by a judge in a New South Wales court.

The issue before the court concerned just such a laneway in the inner suburb of Redfern.  Its ownership was clearly on the deed of a neighboring property and was separated accordingly with a paling fence.  Over the years this fence deteriorated to the point that the man next door dismantled the fence and created what the judge described as a " small boutique Japanese style garden ".  He maintained this for forty years without any objection from the rightful owner.

That changed when the property that legally owned this garden went on the market and was sold. The new owner had the boundaries surveyed and had new fencing erected.  That fence restored the proper alignment and the careful gardener lost this miniscule piece of land measuring  88 centimetres by 3.81 metres.

He went to court with a claim based on an arcane old law embedded in the state law system.  This is termed the " Adverse Possession " law, but is colloquially known as  " Squatters Rights ".  The gardener was able to show that he had enjoyed uninterrupted and exclusive possession of the land for at least twelve years, as required by the law of adverse possession.   Accordingly, he was granted ownership of that land and his neighbor was required to remove that new fence.

That should be a wakeup call to property owners generally across this state.  It is common for arrangements that allow a neighbor to travel across a small section of your property or park a vehicle on land you own over a period of time. In earlier times the fence line was not usually established by a survey and it is quite usual for many dividing lines to contain significant variations.  The legal ownership of such land may be disputed in court if the user decides to apply under this adverse ownership provision.

It also opens an interesting can of worms in country areas of the state and specially in the many abandoned mining towns that dot the land.  Many farms have outlaying buildings that have long past their use and sometimes provide a home for families  down on their luck.  That is specially true in a recession when lack of jobs has desperate people seeking shelter.  What can be an act of kindness in ignoring the presence of a "squatter " can evolve into a land claim if that squatter maintains a presence for the stipulated period of time.

A similar situation exists in abandoned mining towns.  Usually , the town is abandoned because the ore mined has run out, but the homes have owners and the changing value of minerals or new discoveries can breathe new life and that brings ownership into question.

This " adverse ownership " law allows ownership to be disputed and most people are unaware that allowing uncontested presence can lead to loss of their property  !