Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 10 OCTOBER 2025

Adverse Possession, Municipal Parkland: Theimplications Of Kosicki v. Toronto

In a closely divided 5-4 ruling in Kosicki v. Toronto (City), 2025 SCC 28, the Supreme Court of Canada confirmed that municipalities and other public bodies in Ontario are not immune to adverse possession claims, unless the land in question is explicitly protected by legislation.

CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

In a closely divided 5-4 ruling in Kosicki v. Toronto (City), 2025 SCC 28, the Supreme Court of Canada confirmed that municipalities and other public bodies in Ontario are not immune to adverse possession claims, unless the land in question is explicitly protected by legislation.

This breakthrough decision carries significant implications for landowners and public authorities across Ontario, particularly municipal planners and legal departments who must now reassess their land management practices to mitigate exposure and preserve public assets.

Facts

Pawel Kosicki and Megan Munro purchased a residential property in Toronto in 2017, only to later discover that a portion of their backyard was municipally owned and designated as parkland. The land had been expropriated by the Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority in 1958 and conveyed to the City in 1971. That portion of the backyard had been enclosed by a fence since at least 1971, preventing

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from