Acquiring ownership by prescription

Acquisition of ownership by prescription requires two elements: possession, meaning the actual exercise of the powers inherent in the property right, and the passage of the period prescribed by Article 79 of the Property Act, during which those powers are exercised.

Article 69 of the Property Act establishes a presumption that a possessor holds the thing as their own until it is shown that they hold it for someone else. As the General Assembly of the Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court of Cassation explained in Interpretative Decision No. 1 of 6 August 2012 in Interpretative Case No. 1/2012, the presumption under Article 69 applies in the ordinary way between co-owners where their co-ownership arises from a legal fact other than inheritance. If one co-owner began exercising physical control on a basis that excludes possession by the others, the intention to possess as owner is presumed. It suffices to prove that the co-owner exercised control over the entire property for the period under Article 79. If, however, the co-owner began by possessing their own undivided share while holding the property as common property, they hold the other shares on behalf of the other co-owners, and the presumption is considered rebutted. Regardless of how the co-ownership arose, a co-owner who exercises control over the others’ shares can, by unilateral acts, convert holding those shares for others into possession on their own behalf. In a dispute over title, a co-owner relying on prescription for another’s undivided share must prove acts that made clear to the other co-owners an intention to possess their shares as their own.

A lawyer experienced in property law is best placed to initiate and conduct proceedings to establish ownership acquired by prescription.

This article is not a legal opinion or advice on any particular situation or person. For legal assistance in a similar case, consult a lawyer.