Picture two long-time neighbours on an Ontario lakeshore. One family puts out their deck chairs, stores their boats, and maintains a sandy strip beside their cottage for years, so long, it feels like theirs. The other, however, is the legal owner, at least according to the land registry. When friendly arrangements finally turn frosty, a legal battle brews over who really owns the coveted section of beach.
The answer comes courtesy of the Ontario Superior Court in Harmur Investments Ltd. v. Pearce (2025 ONSC 628), a case that highlights how difficult it is to win a claim of adverse possession in today’s Ontario.
The Rules for “Squatter’s Rights”
Under the Real Property Limitations Act, adverse possession means that someone can acquire title to land by meeting a demanding checklist. It’s not enough to simply use or care for a neighbour’s land. Claimants must show that their possession was open (plain for all, especially the true owner, to see), exclusive (nobody else treated it as theirs), and continuous for at least ten years. Most importantly, the occupation cannot have been permitted by the actual owner in any way. True adverse possession must be “hostile,” or in legal terms, against the owner’s interests.
What the Court Saw in Harmur Investments Ltd. v. Pearce
Harmur Investments believed their years of raking sand and storing kayaks on the disputed strip had earned them legal title. The evidence showed decades of occupation, with the kind of open and exclusive use adverse possession requires. Despite this, the owner, Katherine Lillian Pearce, pushed back by arguing that her permission, however informal or neighbourly, had always been behind Harmur’s use.
The judge agreed with Pearce, ruling that any form of consent makes an adverse possession claim impossible in Ontario. No matter how long or thoroughly Harmur used the land, the “hostile” element was missing. The result? Pearce kept title, and Harmur’s claim ended in disappointment.
Why Adverse Possession is Rare Today
Thanks to Ontario’s shift to the electronic Land Titles system, most new claims for adverse possession are blocked. Unless the ten-year period was completed before the property switched from the paper Registry system to Land Titles, legal claims get snuffed out, regardless of what took place afterwards on the ground. Only rights “matured” before the date of conversion survive today.
What Does This Mean for Cottagers and Landowners?
If you’ve been using a neighbour’s property (even with their nod of approval) the courts will likely view your tenure as permitted, not adverse. Neighbourliness and informal sharing can undermine a legal claim, no matter how longstanding or routine. Owners are far more protected if their property is registered under the Land Titles system, and very few modern claims can get past this barrier.
The Harmur Investments v. Pearce tale should motivate everyone to clarify property lines, document understandings, and consult a real estate lawyer before making lasting arrangements. Squatter’s rights are far from an open invitation, and Ontario’s legal system has raised the bar higher than ever.
