Prescription-Interruption of Possession-Whether submersion of land due to an
act of God amounts to interruption

A claim to prescribe for land cannot be made in respect of a period
during which the land has been submerged by act of God, but such sub-
mergence is not such an interruption as would nullify the prescriptive effect
of an earlier period of possession, and therefore the claimant can pray that
earlier period in aid towards the computation of his ten years.

Prescription and Limitation Ordinance 1928,55. 3,4 (5) and 4 (6).

Revision

The essential facts are as follows: Applicant claimed to have
acquired title by prescription to land. He admitted that the land had
remained submerged for a period of twelve years, which period ex-
pired within ten years of action brought, but claimed to have possessed
the land for a period prior to submergence.

June 26, 1936. Gorman C.J.: 1 think in this case that the judge
was wrong in law, in holding that the claim to prescription was neces-
sarily ruled out by reason of the submersion of the land for 12 years.
The pos;;es5ion required by the Ordinance is public, peaceful and un-
interrupted possession for 10 years, provided the continuing has not
been broken by an interruption within the meaning of section 4, sub-
sections (5) and (6), Prescription and Limitation Ordinance 1928.

The period during which the land was submerged was not a period
during which the claimant had actual or notional possession: nor, in the
face of the evidence of submergence, can possession be presumed
during that period, on proof of possession before and possession after.
But the act of God did not amount to an interruption which would
have the effect of nullifying the prescriptive effect of the earlier period
of possession, and therefore the claimant can pray this period in aid
towards the computation of his ten years.

Application allowed