Citing case law and scholarly commentary on
the doctrine of adverse possession, he concluded that «mere use or occupation is not enough» (at para 15) and that «physical possession alone may not be enough» (at para 18).
Adverse Possession, 2nd Edition, covers all aspects of the law and practice relating to adverse possession of registered and unregistered land, and sets out both the general principles and the application of the doctrine to specific types of
Adverse Possession, 2nd Edition, covers all aspects of the law and practice relating to adverse possession of registered and unregistered land, and sets out both the general principles and the application of the doctrine to specific types
Possession, 2nd Edition, covers all aspects
of the law and practice relating to
adverse possession of registered and unregistered land, and sets out both the general principles and the application of the doctrine to specific types of
adverse possession of registered and unregistered land, and sets out both the general principles and the application of the doctrine to specific types
possession of registered and unregistered land, and sets out both the general principles and the application
of the
doctrine to specific types
of cases.
In the current case where we are counsel for the Debtor in
Possession, the Debtor has developed a platform to resell digital music; however, the Debtor received an
adverse ruling from the US District Court in New York holding that the first sale
doctrine does not apply to the resale
of digital music.
Of course, the most obvious distinction is that theft is a legal wrong which can be prosecuted if committed as a crime, while
adverse possession is a curative
doctrine used to determine who owns the property at a given time rather than to punished or affirmative sue someone.