Responsa for Bava Batra 334:7

Q. A had lived undisturbed for more than three years in T when the community ordered him to leave the place because he had received no permission from it to establish a residence there. A claims that the settlement ban against new settlers had been waived for his benefit by all the members of the community who lived in T at the time. The latter deny A's claim.
A. The removal of the ban against settlement by waiver is accepted by the communities as legally binding, although, in talmudic law, rights in real property cannot be waived or relinquished unless the waiver be accompanied by a formal act of possession. But since the community denies A's claim, A must produce proof that the ban against settlement had been waived in his favor. A community is in complete possession of its rights and does not have to protest any encroachments on such rights. Therefore one can not claim usucapion as a factor in obtaining possession of community rights. This law is accepted throughout this Kingdom.
SOURCES: Pr. 46; L. 351; Mordecai Hagadol, p. 308a.

Q. Does the plaintiff or the defendant pay the expenses of the messenger [hired to procure the Responsum from a talmudic authority]?
A. Both the plaintiff and the defendant share equally in such expenses.
SOURCES: Pr. 46; L. 352; Mordecai Hagadol, p. 308a. Cf. end of Cr. 70; Pr. 32.