Sure.... Munster Development Corporation (MDC), a statutory body charged with the promotion of industrial development in the province, purchased a field near Limerick City with the intention of selling it in the future with the benefit of planning permission. The purchase of the field made the local newspapers and media because it was felt that at the time the MDC had paid well over the going market rate for the field. In June 1995, cattle belonging to the neighbouring farmer, Eoin, broke into the field. Eoin noticed that the fencing on the field was in bad repair and that the land appeared to be lying idle. Eoin decided there and then to leave his cattle to graze on the field. A few months later, Eoin repaired the fence and was soon maintaining the fencing on a regular basis, as well as spreading fertilizer on the land. In 2000, Eoin carried out expensive drainage work on the land. In 2002, he retired from farming and transferred whatever right, title or interest he had in the field to his son Ray, who has been farming the land since. In June 2007, MDC put up a site notice indicating that a planning permission application for the erection of a factory had been lodged with the local authority. Ray recently noticed a "For Sale" sign on the property and wrote to the estate agents involved with an offer to purchase the property. He has recently heard that he may have "squatter's rights" to the property, and seeks legal advice on the matter.
On Oct 15, 5:28 pm, Ad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Guys, > > That AP question sounds interesting. Would any of you mind posting it? > > On Oct 15, 5:25 pm, aviationhead <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > I thought the succession questions were ok, though I hope by answering > > the majority of Q8 re S117 I was correct!! > > > The AP question was also ok I think. I presume that by transfering to > > his son the time can continue as though there was no change in > > squatter. Also am I correct in thinking that as it was a 'statutory > > body' that purchased the land, the time period for AP will be 30 > > years? And therefore there could be no AP? > > > On Oct 15, 5:12 pm, ShellBelle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Hey > > > > Ditto what you said about all the help that was given in this forum, > > > has been great! > > > > I thought land was ok apart from the length of the 2 succession > > > questions, ran out of time on the last one they took much longer than > > > my other 3 questions I did. > > > > Was a bit confused in the AP question about of the effect of the fact > > > that the adverse possessor gave the field to his son. Other than that > > > no major problems apart from the fact that I couldn't cite the numbers > > > of the sections in the SLA but I knew the content of the sections so > > > will hopefully be ok!! > > > > On Oct 15, 5:04 pm, aviationhead <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Hi Guys! > > > > Might I just begin by thanking you all for your invaluable help over > > > > the past couple of months. It is much appreciated. > > > > > So How did you all find land today? > > > > > I thought it was a challanging enough paper. But perhaps that was down > > > > to the fact that it was the last exam and burnout wasnt too far away!!- > > > > Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "FE-1 Study Group" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.ie/group/FE-1-Study-Group?hl=en-GB -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
