It is provided in Ontario by the Land Titles Act, R.S.O. 1914, c. 126, s. 29, as follows:

29.- (1) A title to any land adverse to or in derogation of the title of the registered owner shall not be acquired by any length of possession.

(2) This section shall not prejudice, as against any person registered as first owner of land with a possessory title only (n), any adverse claim in respect of length of possession of any other person who was in possession of the land at the time when the registration of such first owner took place.

(m) Richardson v. Younge, 1871, L.R. 6 Ch. 478. (n) An owner with a possessory title means a person who is registered as owner subject to any estate, right or interest adverse to or in derogation of his title and subsisting or capable of arising at the time of the registration of such owner (s. 12), such owner being in possession or the actual possession being in accordance with such owner's alleged title (r. 3, Land Titles Act).

It is provided in Manitoba by the Real Property Act, R.S.M. 1913, c. 171, ss. 82, 83 and 117, as follows:

82. Every certificate of title shall be void as against the title of any person adversely in actual occupation of and rightly entitled to the land at the time when such land was brought under the new system, and who continues in such occupation.

83. After land has been brought under this Act no title adverse or in derogation to the title of the registered owner shall be acquired by any length of possession merely.

117. In so far as any limitation is imposed by The Real Property Limitation Act on the rights, remedies or powers under mortgages, the same shall be held not to apply to mortgagees or encum-brancees in mortgages or encumbrances heretofore or hereafter made under this Act, except as to liability under covenants for payment of any moneys secured thereby. This section shall be retroactive (o).

It is provided in Saskatchewan by the Land Titles Act, 1917, s. 61, as follows:

61.- (1) Every certificate of title shall be void as against the title of any person adversely in occupation of and rightly entitled to the land at the time when such land was brought under this Act.

(2) After land has been brought under this Act no title thereto adverse to or in derogation of the registered owner shall be acquired by possession: Provided, however, that nothing contained in this section shall operate to affect prejudicially any right or interest in land acquired prior to the nineteenth day of December, 1913 (p).

It is provided in British Columbia by the Land Registry Act, R.S.B.C. 1911, c. 127, s. 22, as follows:

22.- (2) Any certificate of indefeasible title issued under the provisions of this Act shall be void as against the title of any person adversely in actual possession of and rightly entitled to the hereditaments included in such certificate at the time of the application upon which such certificate was granted under this Act.

(o) The original of this section was 7 & 8 E. 7, c. 52, s. 6.

(p) The original of this section was the statute 1913, c. 30, s. 6.

(3) After the issuance of a certificate of indefeasible title no title adverse or in derogation to the title of the registered owner shall be acquired by any length of possession merely.

In any of the provinces a registered title may be founded upon a title by possession, that is to say, the evidence of title submitted by a person applying to have the land brought under the land titles system may be merely evidence of actual, visible, continuous and undisturbed possession for a sufficient period under the statute of limitations (q). In Manitoba, Saskatchewan and British Columbia, the rights of a person who is in actual possession and who has acquired a title by possession (r) when an application is made by another person to have the land brought under the system are protected, under the statutes above mentioned, even in the event of a certificate of title being granted to the applicant. There is no similar provision in Alberta or the Northwest Territories, but in view of the nature of the evidence required on the application it is difficult to conceive that the applicant would, except by fraud, be successful in getting himself registered as owner without an opportunity being given to the occupant to assert his rights (s). In Ontario, where likewise there is no provision expressly protecting the actual occupant in the case of an application by another person for registration as owner with an absolute title, the applicant would have the same difficulty in establishing his right to be registered in the event of there being an adverse claimant.in actual possession (t).

In Manitoba (subject to s. 82) and in Saskatchewan (subject to s. 61, sub-s. 1) a certificate of title affords complete protection against a person claiming an adverse title by possession, and under s. 83 of the Manitoba statute it has been held that a mortgagee cannot by length of possession acquire a title as against the mortgagor, the registered owner of the land (u). In Ontario the registration of a person as owner with an absolute title and in British Columbia (subject to s. 22, sub-s. 2) the registration of a person as owner with an indefeasible title affords the registered owner similar protection.

(q) Re Anderton, 1908, 8 W.L.R. 319; Bradshaw v. Patterson, 1911, 4 S.L.R. 208; Thom, The Canadian Torrens System, p. 141.

(r) As Thom, op. cit., p. 142, points out, the statutory period must have completely run, otherwise the actual occupant could not properly be described as "rightly entitled."

(s) Thom, op. cit., p. 142.

(t) See rr. 4, 5, Land Titles Act.

In Alberta and the Northwest Territories on the other hand the title of the registered owner is subject to be defeated by the adverse possession of another person, this case being an instance of the general rule that a certificate of title is not intended to be a continuing charter of title in favour of the registered owner but only so far as he is concerned, a certificate that upon its date he was the registered owner (v).

(u) Smith v. National Trust Co., 1912, 45 Can. S.C.R. 618, 1 D.L.R. 698, affirming 20 M.R. 522.

(v) Thorn, op. cit., p. 143; Harris v. Keith, 1911, 3 A.L.R. 222.