Seeman v. David – sllr 2000 volume 3 page 023

In the case between Plaintiff-Appellants and Defendant-Respondents, the court addressed whether a usufructuary mortgagee could acquire prescriptive rights under the Prescription Ordinance and if such prescriptive rights could merge with proprietary rights conferred by the mortgage bond. The decision determined that a usufructuary mortgagee’s possession, being subordinate and conditional under the bond, does not become adverse merely by passage of time, and thus, prescriptive rights can only accrue following a distinct, overt breach of the mortgage conditions. The findings reaffirmed the principle that prescription begins to run only when the character of possession changes from that of a mortgagee to an adverse possessor by means of unequivocal hostile acts. Reference was made to authorita