Which of the following best describes "exclusive possession" in adverse possession?

"Exclusive possession" in the context of adverse possession refers to a situation where an individual occupies a property without the permission of the actual property owner, effectively treating the property as their own. This possession must be exclusive in the sense that the individual is acting independently, without sharing that possession with others.

To establish adverse possession, the possessor's use must meet several criteria, one of which is that it must be exclusive. This means that the possessor is not sharing the property with the legal owner or others who could claim rights to the property, solidifying their claim as rightful. Possession must also be continuous, open and notorious, and hostile to the interests of the true owner. By occupying the property without the owner's permission (the key aspect of exclusiveness in this case), the possessor can fulfill the requirement necessary to potentially gain legal title to the property after a certain statutory period.

In contrast, possession that is shared with others would not fulfill the exclusivity requirement, negating a crucial criterion for claiming adverse possession. Similarly, allowing unrestricted use of the property by others or possessing it temporarily also do not align with the legal requirements needed to establish a claim of adverse possession.