FavoriteLoadingSave to briefcase | Rating: | By (2012)

  • PrintEmail Link
  • Viewed 2,931 times | Saved to 421 briefcases
Keefer v Arillotta (1976), 13 OR (2d) 680 (CA)


Keefers had a right-of-way across Cloy’s land. Keefer built a garage at the end of the right-of-way and used a grassy area. Cloys still used the driveway and the grassy section occasionally.


The adverse possessor must be using the land in a way inconsistent with the intention of the true owner.

The test for whether a person has adversely possession land:
** (1) Actual possession;
** (2) Intention to possess/exclude the owner; and
** (3) Effective dispossession or exclusion of the owner


Court found that Keefer had only adversely possessed the garage, since the Cloys had made use of the other areas. The Keefers did not use the driveway beyond the intention of the owner, therefore no inconsistent use.


Adverse possession is increasingly becoming irrelevant in light of the Land Titles Act (if land is registered in that system, it eliminates the possibility of adverse possession).

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to participate.

This document is a general discussion of certain legal and related issues and must not be relied upon as legal advice. This document may not have been written or reviewed by a legal practitioner. For more information, please see the website Terms of Service.