This appeal concerns a boundary dispute between two cottage owners on Lake Erie.
The respondents constructed a road and steps on what they believed was their property to improve access to the lakeshore, permitting the appellant and other neighbours to use these improvements.
Upon discovering that much of the work had been performed on the appellant's adjacent lot, the appellant sued for trespass damages.
The respondents counterclaimed for title by adverse possession.
The trial judge dismissed the appellant's trespass claim and granted the respondents title to approximately 3,400 square feet by adverse possession.
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, finding that the trial judge erred in law by granting the adverse possession claim without making an explicit finding that the respondents had effectively excluded the appellant from possession.
The evidence demonstrated the opposite—the respondents had permitted the appellant and others to use the road and steps freely.