Summary
Summary Trespass to land revision notes.
- Module
- Tort law
- Institution
- University Of The West Of England
Tort law - trespass to land revision notes and exam structure for high grades.
[Show more]
Seller
Follow
Content preview
Trespass to land- revision.1. Basis of liability
‘The old strict liability associated with the early action of trespass is ... no longer a safe
guide for allocating responsibility in modern law’. Fleming, The Law of Torts, (8th ed.),
p.39.
1.1 Where Ds entry onto land is voluntary
Most trespasses are intentional that D intended to enter the land.
D lost his way or genuinely mistaken the land to be his
Conway v Wimpey 1951
It is no defence the only reason for D’s entry upon Cs land was D lost his way,
or D mistakenly believed the land to be his.
1.2 Where D’s entry onto C’s land is involuntary
Intrusion of negligence
o From the highway -> D will not be liable unless negligent such as land
adjoining the highway, a result of a car accident. [River Wear
Commissioners v Adamson]
D physically propelled onto Cs land -> HE is not liable if there is no act on the
Ds part [Smith v Stone 1647]
Trespass by animals -> League Against Cruel Sports v Scott 1986
1.3 Damage caused by trespass
An unintentional trespasser is strictly liable for all damage caused by presence on land –
Wormald v Cole 1954.
2. Interference
Must have 2 characteristics:
1. Direct intrusion
2. By a tangible object.
Must be an intrusion of a physical tangible object. IT must be direct and immediate injury.
2.1Interference with airspace
An invasion of airspace above Cs land does constitute a trespass, even though there
is no contact with the land itself.
Kelsen v Imperial Tobacco Co 1957 An advertising sign erected on Ds property
projected into the airspace of Cs shop amounted to a trespass. A mandatory
injunction was granted to remove the sign.
2.1.1 Flying objects- aircraft.
Lord Bernstein v Skyviews and General Ltd [1978]
, ‘The balance...is best struck... by restricting the rights of an owner in the airspace
above his land to such height as is necessary for the ordinary use and
enjoyment of his land and the structures on it.’
Flights which are not a trespass but do interfere with use and enjoyment of land beneath
may constitute an actionable nuisance.
s.76 Civil aviation Act 1982
(i) no action will lie in respect of trespass or nuisance by reason only of the flight of a civil
aircraft over any property at a reasonable height
(ii) if material loss or damage is caused to any property.. unless that damage or loss was
caused by the negligence of the person whom it was suffered, damages are recoverable
without proof of negligence or intention.
2.1.2 Objects placed on Ds land
Objects such as towers, cranes, scaffolding.
Anchor Brewhouse v Berkley House 1987
An oversailing boom of a tower crane does constitute a trespass regardless of the
height.
2.2The highway
A strip of privately owned land dedicated to use of public for passing and repassing.
Who has possession of a highway?
Depends if highway has been adopted by highways authority under Highways Act 1980.
(a) Highways not maintainable at public expense: The possession of a highway is presumed to
be in the person whose land abuts the highway.
(b) Highways maintainable at public expense (e.g. a made-up road): The top surface and
airspace above the highway vests in the highways authority: s.263 Highways Act 1980 (see
Hubbard v Pitt [1976] QB 142). Where the top surface is vested in the highways authority, the
authority can bring proceedings for trespass.
Use of highways
DPP v Jones 1999
Facts: Ds peaceful demonstration on grass verge of A344 outside Stonehenge. Convicted of
taking part in a trespass assembly. Conviction overturned that Ds were simply reasonably
using the highway. Convictions reinstated Ds were committing a trespass to the highway.
Issue: Were Ds trespassing on the highway? Was the demonstration exceeding the limits of
publics rights of access to the highway?
Held: An assembly on the highway was not necessarily unlawful since any reasonable and
usual mode of using the highway is lawful.
Provided these activities are reasonable, do not involve the commission of a public or private
nuisance, and do not amount to an obstruction of the highway unreasonably impeding the
primary right of the general public to pass and repass, they should not constitute a trespass.
Subject to these qualifications, therefore, there would be a public right of peaceful assembly on
the highway.
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller ellie6. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for £3.49. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
Can Stuvia be trusted?
4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
78600 documents were sold in the last 30 days
Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy revision notes and other study material for 14 years now