In Melbourne’s ever-expanding suburbs, thousands of homeowners face a hidden legal obstacle that can derail redevelopment ambitions before a single plan is drawn. It’s not a zoning overlay or council policy—it’s a restrictive covenant, typically containing a deceptively simple phrase: “single dwelling only.” These private land-use restrictions, often registered decades ago, can thwart even the...

The test for acquiring title by adverse possession has not changed in many years. However, the application of that test is complex, taking into account a variety of situations that may affect a claim such as knowledge of the possessor and concurrent rights over the land.

In the case of Jones v. M the plaintiff sued for obstruction to a right-of way at West Melbourne. The plaintiff relied upon a certificate of title, which showed his title to the right-of-way, and the Court held that under the act passed last Session this gave him an indefeasible title to have the right-of-way free from obstruction.

An important decision was given in the Equity Court yesterday (sic), by Mr. Justice Molesworth, in Robertson v. Keith, affecting the value of certificates of title under the Transfer of Land Statute, which have been generally supposed to be unimpeachable, except by claims under adverse possession for 15 years.

Have you unintentionally and recently built over your neighbour's title? It shouldn’t happen. It does happen. It can be a big problem. This situation does occur. And its a problem occurring with more frequency as building plans are drawn to build upon the boundary or boundary to boundary without a setback.