One of the differences between tenancy at sufferance and a trespasser is?

The distinction between tenancy at sufferance and a trespasser indeed lies notably in the ability of a trespasser to potentially gain ownership rights through adverse possession. Adverse possession is a legal doctrine that allows a trespasser to claim ownership of land if they possess it in a way that meets specific criteria, such as being open, notorious, exclusive, adverse, and continuous for a statutory period. This relationship with the property differs significantly from tenancy at sufferance, where a tenant remains in possession of the property after their lease has expired, but their original right to occupy the property was at one point lawful.

Unlike a trespasser, who lacks any legal right to be on the property, a tenant at sufferance began their occupancy lawfully but continues to remain without permission after their lease has ended. Therefore, while the trespasser operates outside of any legal framework regarding the property, a tenant at sufferance has a different relationship due to their previous lawful occupancy, thus highlighting why the ability of a trespasser to claim ownership through adverse possession is a crucial difference.