The Global Docket

Can someone legally acquire land that belongs to someone else simply by possessing it for long enough?

Adverse possession, often referred to as “squatters’ rights”, challenges one of our most basic assumptions about property: that legal ownership and physical possession should belong to the same person.

In this episode, we explore the legal reasoning behind the doctrine, examining why legal systems allow long-term possession to affect title, and whether those justifications still hold up in an age of modern land registration. Through cases including Pye v Graham, Buckinghamshire County Council v Moran and Beaulane Properties v Palmer, we examine the relationship between possession, limitation periods, legal certainty and the protection of property rights.

We also compare the approaches of England and Wales and Australia, revealing how different jurisdictions draw the line between protecting registered ownership and recognising long-established possession.

Ultimately, adverse possession raises a question that goes far beyond squatters’ rights: what does it actually mean to own something, and how far should the law allow time to change that ownership?

When does the state actually deserve our obedience? In this episode, I explore Socrates’ famous decision to remain in prison and what Plato’s Crito can teach us about justice, political authority, and the limits of government power. If the state acts unjustly, are we justified in resisting, and how do we fight injustice without becoming unjust ourselves?

For better understanding, read Plato's Crito, the Apology, and research about Machiavelli's stance on political obligaiton (The Prince by Machiavelli). Enjoy this episode!