⇒ Possession can be established only by a person who is both in factual possession of the land and who intends to possess the land.

⇒ To demonstrate factual possession of land, the claimant must assert "complete and exclusive physical control" over the land (Buckinghamshire CC v Moran [1990] per Slade LJ).

• In other words, the claimant must demonstrate that they (and they alone) have been dealing with the land as an occupying owner would be expected to deal with it.
• An essential element of factual possession is control over the access of strangers to the land and their activities on the land. See, for example, the case of J A Pye (Oxford) Ltd v Graham (2003).

⇒ For a claimant to demonstrate an intention to posses land, they must intend "to exclude the world at large so far as is reasonably practicable" (Powell v Macfarlane (1977) per Slade J).

• This intent to possess can be inferred from the factual possession. So, in practice, if a claimant factually possesses land it would be easy for them to prove they intend possess the land too.

⇒ So, a claimant who behaves as if they own land satisfies both the physical and mental elements of "possession". In the absence of a stonger claim to possession (see 'Relativity of title' below), the claimant is entitled to an estate in land.

⇒ In theory, possession is an absolute concept: either X is in possession of land, or he is not.

⇒ However, recently there has been a dilution of our traditional understanding of possession: we are seeing a 'relativity of title' when it comes to unregistered land. In other words, in some circumstances it may be possible to say that some people have a greater claim to the land than someone else e.g. Manchester Airport v Dutton [2000].

⇒ A purchaser of unregistered land needs to judge whether the seller has good title to the freehold and that it is safe for them to pass on the title.

⇒ In the modern day, possession of the land is not the only evidence of the seller's title to the land. Evidence of the seller's title also lies in the chain of documentary records ('title deeds') detailing previous transactions with the land.

• In other words, the seller must not only have possession but must have their title to the land verified by looking for a 'root of title', which the purchaser can then rely on as proof of ownership.
• The 'root of title' is the most recent conveyance of the land occring at least 15 years (Law of Property Act 1969, section 23) prior to the date of the proposed sale and from which there is an unbroken chain of ownership to the present seller.
• For example, lets say you buy land in 2017 and find the previous transactions are from A to B in 2008, B to C in 2005, and C to D in 1989. The transaction between C and D is the vendor's root of title and the subsequent transactions (A to B and B to C) up to the current transaction (2016) is the unbroken chain necessary to establish the vendor has good title and can therefore sell the property.

⇒ In your exam, mention the point that English common law has historically emphasised possession of land rather than ownership. Indeed, as mentioned before, no one can actually own land. Emphasis on possession is still true today, for example, a person will not have a leasehold estate unless he or she is granted exclusive possession of the leasehold property.

⇒ Some other helpful legal resources on possession:

• Law Teacher: Posession
• New Law Journal: Factual Posession