Nemiah Missick and Danielle Missick v Nadio Outten (CL 89 of 2019) [2021] TCASC 5 (23 February 2021)

Flynote

Property Law

Case summary

The Defendant has trespassed onto the Plaintiffs’ land to the extent of 0.06 acres. Judgment for the Plaintiffs and the Defendant is ordered to: (i) forthwith pull down and remove the portion of a building on the Plaintiffs’ land; (ii) damages for trespass to be assessed following the pulling down of the structure; (iii) interest on such damages assessed; and (iv) costs.  The Defendant has not established the defence of a right to title by prescription, which required the Defendant to show on the preponderance of probabilities, that he had occupied the area of land in dispute in an open manner, over an uninterrupted period of twenty years, and that the occupation was without the permission of the landowner, although such owner must have known about it, but chose not to enforce his rights. A prescriptive title in the TCI is acquired by registration under s 135 of the Registered Land Ordinance, and not the mere fact of long, uninterrupted use (paras 27-51) Arthur v The Attorney General of the Turks & Caicos Islands (Turks and Caicos Islands) (Rev 1) (JCPC 2011/0074) [2012] UKPC 30 (16 August 2012) [CONSIDERED] 

---