LAW OF TRESPASS

Trespass is an area of criminal law or tort law broadly divided into three groups: trespass to the person,trespass to chattels and trespass to land. Trespass to the person historically involved six separate trespasses: threats, assault, battery, wounding, mayhem (or maiming), and false imprisonment.

respass in English law is an area of tort law broadly divided into three groups: trespass to the person, trespass to goods and trespass to land.

Trespass to the person comes in three variants: assault, which is “to act in such a way that the claimant believes he is about to be attacked”;[1]battery, “the intentional and direct application of force to another person”;[2] and false imprisonment, “depriving the claimant of freedom of movement, without a lawful justification for doing so”.[3] All three require that the act be a direct and intentional act, with indirect or unintentional acts falling under the tort of negligence. Battery and assault require the claimant to establish that the defendant intended to act, while false imprisonment is a tort of strict liability. The guiding principle behind all three is based on the statement of Goff, LJ, who stated in Collins v Wilcock that “any person’s body is inviolate”,[4] excepting normal, day-to-day physical contact.

Trespass to goods is defined as “wrongful physical interference with goods that are in the possession of another”,[5] and is covered not only by the common law, but also by the Torts (Interference with Goods) Act 1977. The “trespass” can be as little as touching or moving the goods, given the right circumstances. It is unknown whether intention is required for a claim under trespass to goods, as the matter has never gone to court; the courts have confirmed that for damages to be awarded for harm suffered, the harm must have been reasonably foreseeable.

Trespass to land involves the “unjustifiable interference with land which is in the immediate and exclusive possession of another”;[6] it is both a tort and, in certain circumstances, a crime under the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994. It is not necessary to prove that harm was suffered to bring a claim, and is instead actionable per se. While most trespasses to land are intentional, the courts have decided that it could also be committed negligently. Accidental trespass also incurs liability.

Trespass:

Trespass is  in  widest sense signifies any transgression or offense against the law of offense against nature, of society or of the country, whether relating to a mans person or to his property.

According to famous Indian writer “Ratanlal & Dhirajlal” Trespass in its widest sense, signifies any transgression or any offense against the law of nature of society, or of the country, whether relating to a man’s person or to his property.

So we can say that, every invasion of private property be it ever so minute is a trespass.

In English common law trespass was of three kinds:

1. Trespass quare clausum freight. (Trespass of the Land)

2. Trespass viet armis. (Trespass of the Person)

3. Trespass de bonis asportatis. (Trespass of the Goods)

Definition of Trespass to the land:

Trespass to land is unjustifiable interference with the possession of it. Wrongful entry upon the land of another. Possession is an important concept in law. The legal consequences which flow from the acquisition and loss of it are many and serious. Possession is the evidence of ownership. Any unjustified intrusion by one person upon land in the possession of another will constitute trespass.

Entic Vs. Carrington (1765) 19 Tr 1066

“Every invasion of private property be it ever so minute is trespass.”

Winfield: “If I plant a tree in your land that is trespass. But if the roots or branches of a tree on my land project into or over your land, that is a nuisance.”

How trespass commits: Trespass to land may be committed by the following three ways.

  1. Entry is essential to commit a trespass. (Trespass by wrongful Entry)
  2. By remaining there. (Remaining on Land)
  3. By doing an act affecting the sole possession of the land. (Placing thing on Land)

# Trespass by wrongful Entry: A man is not liable for a trespass committed involuntarily, but he is liable if the entry is intentional, even though made under a mistake.

Joliffe vs. Willmett & Co. (1971) 1 All ER 478

“An entry upon the lands of another constitutes trespass to land whether or not the entrant knows that he is trespassing.”

But a person is not liable if his entrance is involuntary.

Aerial trespass:  Trespass in the airspace above land.

“Cujus est solum ejus est usque ad coelum”: Whose is the soil his is also that which is above it.

This maxim does not means any ownership over the infinite space but only means that if  one owns portion of the earths surface, one also owns anything below or above that portion which is capable of being reduced into private ownership.

It is also a trespass to place anything on or in land in the possession of another as by driving a nail into his wall or placing rubbish against his wall. It will mean actual entrance.

# Remaining on Land: A person who has lawfully entered into on land in the possession of another commits a trespass if he remains there after his right of entry has ceased. A license whose license has been terminated or is extinguished by expiry can be sued as a trespasser if he does not vacate after request and laps of a reasonable time.

# placing thing on Land:  Every interference with the land of another, throwing stones or materials over a neighbors land is deemed constructive entry and amounts to trespass.

Constructive entry: Planting trees to others land. Placing any animal on others land.

Trespass ab initio:

Abuse of authority: If one who is entitled by law to do an act abuses his authority to do it he is said to be trespass ab initio. His act is reckoned as unlawful from the very beginning however innocent his conduct may have been up to the moment of his abuse.

Elias vs. Pasmore (1934) 2KB 174

Two policeman lawfully entered premises to arrest one of the plaintiffs and whilst on the premises took possession of a large number of documents. Some rightfully and some wrongfully. They were not liable as trespass ab initio.

Six Carpenters Case (1610) 1 SMLC 134

Six carpenters entered a tavern asked for wine and paid for it. After wards they asked a second supply, but refuse to pay for it. Held that mere non payment was a misfeasance which was not sufficient to render them trespasser ab initiation.

Conditions:

1. Authority abused must be given by the law not by an individual.

2. The abuse must amount to a positive wrongful act.

3. Stealing something from a common inn.

Disclaimer:

The information contains in this web-site is prepared for educational purpose. This site may be used by the students, faculties, independent learners and the learned advocates of all over the world. Researchers all over the world have the access to upload their writes up in this site. In consideration of the people’s participation in the Web Page, the individual, group, organization, business, spectator, or other, does hereby release and forever discharge the Lawyers & Jurists, and its officers, board, and employees, jointly and severally from any and all actions, causes of actions, claims and demands for, upon or by reason of any damage, loss or injury, which hereafter may be sustained by participating their work in the Web Page. This release extends and applies to, and also covers and includes, all unknown, unforeseen, unanticipated and unsuspected injuries, damages, loss and liability and the consequences thereof, as well as those now disclosed and known to exist.  The provisions of any state’s law providing substance that releases shall not extend to claims, demands, injuries, or damages which are known or unsuspected to exist at this time, to the person executing such release, are hereby expressly waived. However the Lawyers & Jurists makes no warranty expressed or implied or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product or process disclosed or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product process or service by trade name, trade mark, manufacturer or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation or favouring by the Lawyers & Jurists. The views and opinions of the authors expressed in the Web site do not necessarily state or reflect those of the Lawyers & Jurists. Above all, if there is any complaint drop by any independent user to the admin for any contents of this site, the Lawyers & Jurists would remove this immediately from its site.