“The finding that the Idumugbes were in exclusive possession appears to us to put them in a position in which they can maintain an action for trespass against anybody interfering with that possession who cannot show a better title than they have. Counsel agreed with the statement of the law as given by the late Sir Henley Coussey in England v. Palmer, 14 W.A.C.A., p. 659, at p. 660, where the learned judge made it clear that mere possession is sufficient to maintain trespass against anyone who cannot show a better title or right, so as to avoid the effect of the plaintiff’s actual possession.”
LawCompass
… the Digital Solution Research Tool
