Free Essay

Tort Law, Trespass to Land

In:

Submitted By Socrates61
Words 6025
Pages 25
Tort Law – Trespass to Land
Tort Law - Definition A body of rights, obligations, and remedies that is applied by courts in civil proceedings to provide relief for persons who have suffered harm from the wrongful acts of others. The person who sustains injury or suffers pecuniary damage as the result of tortious conduct is known as the plaintiff, and the person who is responsible for inflicting the injury and incurs liability for the damage is known as the defendant or tortfeasor.
Trespass to Land –Definition In modern law the word trespass is used most commonly to describe the intentional and wrongful invasion of another's real property. An action for trespass can be maintained by the owner or anyone else who has a lawful right to occupy the real property, such as the owner of an apartment building, a tenant, or a member of the tenant's family. The action can be maintained against anyone who interferes with the right of ownership or possession, whether the invasion is by a person or by something that a person has set in motion. For example, a hunter who enters fields where hunting is forbidden is a trespasser, and so is a company that throws rocks onto neighboring land when it is blasting. Every unlawful entry onto another's property is trespass, even if no harm is done to the property. A person who has a right to come onto the land may become a trespasser by committing wrongful acts after entry. For example, a mail carrier has a privilege to walk up the sidewalk at a private home but is not entitled to go through the front door. A person who enters property with permission but stays after he has been told to leave also commits a trespass. Moreover, an intruder cannot defend himself in a trespass action by showing that the plaintiff did not have a completely valid legal right to the property. The reason for all of these rules is that the action of trespass exists to prevent breaches of the peace by protecting the quiet possession of real property.
History
Tort Law originated in England with the action of trespass. Initially trespass was any wrongful conduct directly causing injury or loss; in modern law trespass is an unauthorized entry upon land. A trespass gives the aggrieved party the right to bring a civil lawsuit and collect damages as compensation for the interference and for any harm suffered. Trespass is an intentional tort and, in some circumstances, can be punished as a crime. Common-Law Form of Action Trespass is one of the ancient Forms of Action that arose under the Common Law of England as early as the thirteenth century. It was considered a breach of the king's peace for which the wrongdoer might be summoned before the king's court to respond in a civil proceeding for the harm caused. Because the king's courts were primarily interested in land ownership disputes, the more personal action of trespass developed slowly at first. Around the middle of the fourteenth century, the clerks of the king's courts began routinely giving out writs that permitted a plaintiff to begin a trespass action. Before that time criminal remedies for trespass were more common. The courts were primarily concerned with punishing the trespasser rather than compensating the landowner. From the beginning a defendant convicted of trespass was fined; a defendant who could not pay the fine was imprisoned. The fine in this criminal proceeding developed into an award of damages to the plaintiff. This change marked the beginning of tort action under the common law. As trespass developed into a means of compelling the defendant to compensate the plaintiff for injury to his property interests, it took two forms: an action for trespass on real property and an action for injury to Personal Property. In an action for trespass on land, the plaintiff could recover damages for the defendant's forcible interference with the plaintiff's possession of his land. Even the slightest entry onto the land without the plaintiff's permission gave the plaintiff the right to damages in a nominal sum. Later, an additional Cause of Action was recognized for injuries that were not forcible or direct. This action was called trespass on the case or action on the case because its purpose was to protect the plaintiff's legal rights, rather than her person or land, from intentional force. Over the years the courts recognized other forms of actions that permitted recovery for injuries that did not exactly fit the forms of trespass or trespass on the case. Eventually, writs were also issued for these various types of actions. For example, a continuing trespass was a permanent invasion of someone's rights, as when a building overhung a neighbor's land. A trespass for mesne profits was a form of action against a tenant who wrongfully took profits, such as a crop, from the property while he occupied it. A trespass to try title was a form of action to recover possession of real property from someone who was not entitled to it. This action "tried title" so that the court could order possession for the person who turned out to be the rightful owner. These common-law forms of action had serious shortcomings. A plaintiff who could not fit his/ her complaint exactly into one of the forms could not proceed in court, even if he/she obviously had been wronged. Modern law has remedied this situation by enacting rules of Civil Procedure that replace the common-law forms with more flexible ways of wording a civil complaint. The various trespass actions are still important, however, because modern property laws are largely based on them. The rights protected remain in force, and frequently even the old names are still used.
Defense to Trespass

The tort of trespassing protects the interest in the exclusive possession of the land. Anyone who has an actual and exclusive possession of land can bring action for trespass as a plaintiff: therefore, you do not necessarily have to own land to bring a trespassing claim - you just need to have the legal right to exclude others. Trespassing has two elements: An actual interference with the right of exclusive possession (called the "entry element"), and intent or negligence. Notably, there is no damage requirement, though pollution and neighbor trespass cases are an exception to this rule (they require a showing of damages).
A trespasser is a person who enters or remains upon land in the possession of another without a privilege to do so created by the possessor's consent or otherwise.
Trespass to Land

The Restatement (2nd) of Torts, section 329, states:

As for the intent element, technically the person must intend to be on the land that they are on. But, in keeping with the hair-splitting often found in the nooks and crannies of the law, this does not mean the person must know that they are trespassing. To illustrate this point, imagine walking along a road, out in the country, that is bordered by a large field, which you are unsure whether it is private property or public land. In a simple example, the law draws a distinction between deciding to cut across the property (trespassing), and say accidentally meandering off the road in darkness (no trespassing). But, lack of intent is not a complete bar to prosecution - negligent acts that lead to entry can be prosecuted as well. So, if instead of walking along the road at night, you were driving along at an excessive speed and accidentally left the road and entered the property, trespassing would likely be found.

Trespassing should be contrasted with nuisance, which protects the quiet enjoyment of land. The major differences between the two torts are that nuisance claims need to show both damages and that the invasion was unreasonable - elements noticeably lacking in trespassing.
An unlawful intrusion that interferes with one's person or property.

In a trespass action, the plaintiff does not have to show that the defendant intended to trespass but only that she intended to do whatever caused the trespass. It is no excuse that the trespasser mistakenly believed that she was not doing wrong or that she did not understand the wrong. A child can be a trespasser, as can a person who thought that she was on her own land.

Injury to the property is not necessary for the defendant to be guilty of trespass, although the amount of damages awarded will generally reflect the extent of the harm done to the property. For example, a person could sue birdwatchers who intruded onto his land but would probably receive only nominal damages. A farmer who discovers several persons cutting down valuable hardwood trees for firewood could recover a more substantial amount in damages.

Trespassers are responsible for nearly all the consequences of their unlawful entry, including those that could not have been anticipated or are the result of nothing more wrongful than the trespass itself. For example, if a trespasser carefully lights a fire in the stove of a lake cabin and a fault in the stove causes the cabin to burn down, the trespasser can be held liable for the fire damage.

Courts have had to consider how far above and below the ground the right to possession of land extends. In United States v. Causby, 328 U.S. 256, 66 S. Ct. 1062, 90 L. Ed. 1206 (1946), the U.S. Supreme Court held the federal government liable for harm caused to a poultry business by low-altitude military flights. The Court concluded that because the airspace above land is like a public highway, ordinary airplane flights cannot commit trespass. In this case, however, the planes were flying below levels approved by federal law and regulations, so the government was held responsible. Its activity was a "taking" of private property, for which the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution requires just compensation.

It may be a trespass to tunnel or mine under another person's property, to force water or soil under the property, or to build a foundation that crosses under the boundary line. Underground encroachments are usually an exception to the rule that no harm needs to be shown in order to prove a trespass. Generally, trespass actions are permitted only where there is some damage to the surface or some interference with the owner's rights to use her property.

Trespass by One Entitled to Possession in nearly all states, a person who forcibly enters onto land is guilty of a crime, even if that person is entitled to possession of the land. For example, a landlord who personally tries to eject a tenant creates a potentially explosive situation. To discourage such "self-help," the states provide legal procedures for the rightful owner to use to recover his land. Many states do not let the illegal occupant sue the rightful owner in trespass for his forcible entry, but the occupant can sue for Assault and Battery or damage to her personal property.

Continuing Trespass is continuing when the offending object remains on the property of the person entitled to possession. A building or fence that encroaches on a neighbor's property creates a continuing trespass, as does a tree that has fallen across a boundary line. Some courts have allowed a series of lawsuits where there is a continuing trespass, but the prevailing view is that the dispute should be settled in its entirety in one action.

The remedies can be tailored to the particular kind of harm done. A defendant might have to pay damages to repair the plaintiff's property or compensate the plaintiff for the diminished value of her property. Where a structure or object is on the plaintiff's property, the defendant may be ordered to remove it.

Defenses in some cases a defendant is not liable for trespass even though she has intruded onto another's property. Public officials, for example, do not have any special right to trespass, but a housing inspector with a Search Warrant can enter someone's building whether the owner consents or not. A police officer can pursue a criminal across private property without liability for trespass. The police officer's defense to a claim of trespass is her lawful authority to enter.

A hotel employee who enters a guest's room to perform housekeeping services is not a trespasser because it is customary to assume that guests want such services. If charged with trespass by the guest, the hotel would claim the guest consented to the employee's entry.

A landlord does not have the right to enter a tenant's apartment whenever the landlord wants. However, the landlord usually has the right to enter to make repairs. The landlord must arrange a reasonable time for the repairs, but the tenant's consent to this arrangement is either contained in the lease or is implied from the landlord's assumption of responsibility for making repairs inside the apartment.

A person is not guilty of trespass if he goes onto another's land to protect life or property during an emergency. For example, a passerby who sees someone pointing a gun at another person may cross onto the property and subdue the person with the gun. Someone at the scene of a traffic accident may go onto private property to pull a victim from one of the vehicles.

Permission to enter someone else's property can be given either by consent or by license. Consent simply means giving permission or allowing another onto the land. For example, a person who lets neighborhood children play in her yard has given consent. Consent may be implied from all the circumstances. A homeowner who calls a house painter and asks for an estimate cannot later complain that the painter trespassed by coming into her yard.

Sometimes consent to enter another's land is called a license, or legal permission. This license is not necessarily a certificate and may be in the form of a written agreement. For example, an electric company might have a license to enter private property to maintain electrical lines or to read the electric meter. The employees cannot act unreasonably when they make repairs, and they and the company are liable for any damage they cause to the property.

Duty to TrespassersA homeowner is limited in what he can do to protect his family and property from trespassers. The homeowner cannot shoot children who keep cutting across the lawn or set traps or deadly spring-operated guns to kill anyone who trespasses on the property. Deadly Force in any manner is generally not justifiable except in Self-Defense while preventing a violent felony. Mere trespass is not a felony.

The owner or person in possession of real property can be held liable if guests are injured on the property because of the owner's Negligence. A property owner generally does not have the same duty to make the premises safe for a trespasser, however. A trespasser assumes the risk of being injured by an unguarded excavation, a fence accidentally electrified by a falling wire, or a broken stair. The occupant of real property has a duty only to refrain from intentionally injuring a trespasser on the premises.

These general rules have several exceptions, however. A property owner who knows that people frequently trespass at a particular place on his land must act affirmatively to keep them out or exercise care to prevent their injury. If the trespasser is a child, most states require an occupant of land to be more careful because a child cannot always be expected to understand and appreciate dangers. Therefore, if the property owner has a swimming pool, the law would classify this as an attractive nuisance that could be expected to cause harm to a child. The property owner must take reasonable precautions to prevent a trespassing child from harm. In this case the erection of a fence around the swimming pool would likely shield the property owner from liability if a child trespassed and drowned in the pool.

Criminal TrespassAt common law a trespass was not criminal unless it was accomplished by violence or breached the peace. Some modern statutes make any unlawful entry onto another's property a crime. When the trespass involves violence or injury to a person or property, it is always considered criminal, and penalties may be increased for more serious or malicious acts. Criminal intent may have to be proved to convict under some statutes, but in some states trespass is a criminal offense regardless of the defendant's intent.

Some statutes consider a trespass criminal only if the defendant has an unlawful purpose in entering or remaining in the place where he has no right to be. The unlawful purpose may be an attempt to disrupt a government office, theft, or Arson. Statutes in some states specify that a trespass is not criminal until after a warning, either spoken or by posted signs, has been given to the trespasser. Criminal trespass is punishable by fine or imprisonment or both.

Further readings
Epstein, Richard A. 2003. "Cybertrespass." University of Chicago Law Review 70 (winter).

Saba, John D., Jr. 2002. "Internet Property Rights: E-trespass." St. Mary's Law Journal 33 (winter).

Schoenberg, Tom. 2003. "Supreme Court Examines Trespassing Policy." Legal Times (May 1).

Cross-references
Eminent Domain; Landlord and Tenant.

West's Encyclopedia of American Law, edition 2. Copyright 2008 The Gale Group, Inc. All rights reserved.
Ads by GoogleWhat is Your Claim Worth?
*Free* Ask a Local Lawyer Now Be Rewarded for Pain & Suffering! www.Personal-Injury-Help.us --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

trespass n. entering another person's property without permission of the owner or his/her agent and without lawful authority (like that given to a health inspector) and causing any damage, no matter how slight. Any interference with the owner's (or a legal tenant's) use of the property is a sufficient showing of damage and is a civil wrong (tort) sufficient to form the basis for a lawsuit against the trespasser by the owner or a tenant using the property. Trespass includes erecting a fence on another's property or a roof which overhangs a neighbor's property, swinging the boom of a crane with loads of building materials over another's property, or dumping debris on another's real estate. In addition to damages, a court may grant an injunction prohibiting any further continuing, repeated or permanent trespass.

Copyright © 1981-2005 by Gerald N. Hill and Kathleen T. Hill. All Right reserved.
Ads by GooglePersonal Injury Accident
Free Injury Compensation Evaluation Protect Your Rights - Don’t Settle!
AccidentAttorneys.com

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- trespass verb advance upon, breach, break in, break the law, contravene, deviate from rectitude, disobey, dissbey the law, disregard, encroach, enter unlawfully, go astray, ignore limits, in alienum fundum ingredi, infringe, intrude, invade, offend, overrun, overstep, sin, transgress, usurp, violate
Associated concepts: action of trespass, constructive tressass, continuing trespass, forcible trespass, innocent tressass, malicious trespass, technical trespass, willful and deeiberate trespass
Foreign phrases: Aedificare in tuo proprio solo non licet quod alteri noceat.It is not lawful to build upon one's own land what may injure another. Prohibetur ne quis faciat in suo quod nocere possit alieno. It is forbidden for anyone to do on his own property what may injure another's.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
See also: accroach, breach, break, delinquency, disobey, disregard, encroach, encroachment, impinge, impose, infraction, infringe, infringement, intrude, intrusion, invade, invasion, lapse, misconduct, misdeed, misdoing, obtrude, omission, overstep, transgression, violate, violation, wrong
Burton's Legal Thesaurus, 4E. Copyright © 2007 by William C. Burton. Used with permission of The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

Ads by GoogleIs He Lying To You?
1) Search His E-Mail Address 2) See Hidden Pics & Social Profiles Now!
Spokeo.com/Uncover-Liars

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TRESPASS, remedies. The name of an action, instituted for the recovery of damages, for a wrong committed against the plaintiff, with immediate force; as an assault and battery against the person; an unlawful entry into his, land, and an unlawful injury with direct force to his personal property. It does not lie for a mere non-feasance, nor when the matter affected was not tangible. 2. The subject will be considered with regard, 1. To the injuries for which trespass may be sustained. 2. The declaration. 3. The plea. 4. The judgment. 3.-Sec. 1. This part of the subject will be considered with reference to injuries, 1. The person. 2. To personal property. 3. To real property. 4. When trespass can or cannot be justified by legal proceedings. 4.-1. Trespass is the proper remedy for an assault and battery, wounding, imprisonment, and the like, and it also lies for an injury to the relative rights when occasioned by force; as, for beating, wounding, and imprisoning a wife or servant, by which the plaintiff has sustained a loss. 9 Co. 113; 10 Co. 130. Vide Parties to actions; Per guod, and 1 Chit. Pr. 37. 5.-2. The action of trespass is the proper remedy for injuries to personal property, which may be committed by the several acts of unlawfully striking, chasing, if alive, and carrying away to the damage of the plaintiff, a personal chattel, 1 Saund. 84, n. 2, 3; F. N. B. 86; Bro. Trespass, pl. 407; Toll. Executors, 112; Cro. Jac. 362, of which another is the owner and in possession; but a naked possession or right to immediate possession, is a sufficient title to support this action. 1 T. R. 480; and gee 8. John. R. 432; 7 John. R. 535; 11 John. R. 377; Cro. Jac. 46; 1 Chit. Pl. 165. 6.-3. Trespass is the proper remedy for the several acts of breaking through an enclosure, and coming into contact with any corporeal hereditament, of which another is the owner and in possession, and by which a damage has ensued. There is an ideal fence, reaching in extent upwards, a superficie terrae usque ad caelum, which encircles every man's possessions, when he is owner of the surface, and downwards as far as his property descends; the entry, therefore, is breaking through this enclosure, and this generally constitutes, by itself, a right of action. The plaintiff must be the owner, and in possession. 5 East, R. 485; 9 John. R. 61; 12 John. R. 183; 11 John. R. 385; Id. 140; 3 Hill, R. 26. There must have been some injury, however, to entitle the plaintiff to recover, for a man in a balloon may legally be said to break the close of the plaintiff, when passing over it, as he is wafted by the wind, yet as the owner's possession is not by that act incommoded, trespass could not probably be maintained; yet, if any part of the machinery were to fall upon the land, the aeronaut could not justify an entry into it to remove it, which proves that the act is not justifiable. 19 John. 381 But the slightest injury, as treading down the grass, is sufficient. Vide 1 Chit. Pl. 173; 2 John, R. 357: 9 John. R. 113, 377; 2 Mass. R. 127; 4 Mass. R. 266; 4 John. R. 150. 7.-4. It is a general rule that when the defendant has acted under regular process of a court of competent jurisdiction, or of a single magistrate having jurisdiction of the subject-matter, it is a sufficient justification to him; but when the court has no jurisdiction and the process is wholly void, the defendant cannot justify under it. 8. But there are some cases, where an officer will not be justified by the warrant or authority of a court, having jurisdiction. These exceptions are generally founded on some matter of public policy or convenience; for example, when a warrant was issued against a mail carrier, though the officer was justified in serving the warrant, he was liable to an indictment for detaining such mail carrier under the warrant, for by thus detaining him, he was guilty of "willfully obstructing or retarding the passage of the mail, or of the driver or carrier," contrary to the provisions of the act of congress of 1825, ch. 275, s. 9. 8 Law Rep. 77. See Ambassador; Justification. 9.-Sec. 2. The declaration should contain a concise statement of the injury complained of, whether to the person, personal or real property, and it must allege that the injury was committed vi et armis and contra pacem; in which particulars it differs from a declaration in case. See Case, remedies. 10.-Sec. 3. The general issue is not guilty. But as but few matters can be given in evidence under this plea, it is proper to plead special matters of defence. 11.-Sec. 4. The judgment is generally for the damages assessed by the jury, and for costs. When the judgment is for the defendant, it is that be recover his costs. Vide Irregularity; Regular and Irregular process. Vide, generally, Bro. Ab. h.t.; Nelson's Ab. h.t.; Bac. Ab. h.t.; Dane's Ab. h.t.; Com. Dig. h.t.; Vin. Ab. h.t.; the various American and English Digests, h.t.; 2 Phil. Ev. 131; Ham. N. P. 33 to 265; Chit. Pr. Index, h.t.; Rose. Civ. Ev. h.t.; Stark. Ev. h.t.; Bouv. Inst. Index, h.t.

A Law Dictionary, Adapted to the Constitution and Laws of the United States. By John Bouvier. Published 1856.

Ads by GoogleSearch Public Records
Search Records For Free, Sign Up & See Anyone's Public Records.
InstantCheckMate.com

Want to thank TFD for its existence? Tell a friend about us, add a link to this page, add the site to iGoogle, or visit the webmaster's page for free fun content.

Link to this page:
<a href="http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Trespass+to+land">trespass</a>

Please bookmark with social media, your votes are noticed and appreciated:

Advertisement (Bad banner? Please let us know) ?Page tools
Printer friendly
Cite / link Feedback
Add definition

Advertisement (Bad banner? Please let us know)
Related Ads
▪ Civil Lawsuit
▪ Criminal Law Laws
▪ Attorney Cases
▪ Attorney at Law
▪ Law Cases ▪ Tort Law
▪ Litigation Law
▪ Injury Law
▪ Civil Court Law
▪ Property Law

?My Word List
Add current page to the list

Advertisement (Bad banner? Please let us know)
?Charity
Feed a hungry child - donate to school feeding program

ENTRY ONTO LAND

Peter Cotter, Solicitor, Fitzroy Legal Service

TrespassingOfficials on your land

Trespassing

If you deliberately or carelessly do something that directly causes interference with someone else's land, you commit a trespass. It is not usually a crime, but is a civil wrong, and you can be sued for doing it even if you did not cause any damage by trespassing.

The most common example of trespass is when you go onto someone's land without their permission. It is also trespass to dump rubbish on someone else's land. Land includes everything above and below the ground, so you might be trespassing if you burrow under someone else's land.

To bring an action against someone for trespass, you have to show that you have a right to exclusive possession (rather than ownership) of the land on which the trespass occurred.

Signs that have the words "Trespassers will be prosecuted" written on them are not strictly accurate. Technically you can only be prosecuted if you commit a crime.

The crime of trespass is dealt with under section 9 of the SOA. A person can be guilty of trespass if they:

◾trespass in a "public place" and neglect or refuse to leave after being warned;
◾enter a "private place" or "scheduled public place" without express authority unless for a legitimate purpose; or
◾neglect or refuse to leave a "private place" or a "scheduled public place" after being given a warning and do not have a lawful excuse.

The terms "public place" and "scheduled public place" are defined in section 3 of the SOA.

WHAT YOU CAN DO

You are allowed to eject a person who comes onto your land without your permission. You must not use any more force than is reasonably necessary to do this. Obviously you should first ask the person to leave before you consider any more drastic action. If you use too much force, you may be guilty of assault and could be committing a crime or be sued for damages for any injuries the "trespasser" suffers as a result of your actions.

WHAT A COURT CAN DO

If you can convince a court that someone has trespassed on your property, it can order the trespasser:

1.to stop trespassing now, and to never trespass again (this is an injunction); and/or
2.to pay you compensation.

If a trespasser claims to be entitled to stay on your land, you can ask the Court to decide if this claim is valid and, if it is not, to give you a writ for possession.

WHEN YOU CAN TRESPASS

If someone sues you for trespass you may have a defence if any of the following has occurred:

1.you were on the land with the permission of the person who is suing you;
2.you have been authorised by some law to go onto the land (see "Officials on your land", below, for examples);
3.you have gone onto the land to stop a nuisance (see: "Nuisance", above); or
4.you have gone onto the land to get back goods that belong to you. This only applies if the goods have been put there by or with the help of the person on the land or someone who has stolen the goods.

Officials on your land

The law allows some people to come onto your land without your permission.

POLICE

Police are allowed onto your land if they have a warrant, which they should show you when seeking entry to your land. If they don't have a warrant, they may only enter your land if you invite them, or if particular circumstances arise, such as making an arrest, stopping a breach of the peace or ensuring that the SOA is being complied with (see: "Power to search without warrant", in Chapter 3*2 Arrest and Interrogation).

METER READERS AND OTHERS

Gas, water and electricity meter readers, post office officials, health officers, and council officers are also allowed to come onto your property. All of these people should show you some proof of identity, and are allowed onto your land only for specific purposes related to their jobs.

Licensed surveyors (and people acting under their direction and supervision) are also permitted onto your land for the purpose of carrying out a survey. Even then, there are restrictions as to giving notice and the time at which entry is permitted.

FIRE BRIGADE

The fire brigade can come onto your property and do whatever it thinks is necessary to stop a fire, including deliberately damaging your property. No one else is allowed to cause any damage to your property.

ENTRY ONTO LAND

Peter Cotter, Solicitor, Fitzroy Legal Service

TrespassingOfficials on your land

Trespassing

If you deliberately or carelessly do something that directly causes interference with someone else's land, you commit a trespass. It is not usually a crime, but is a civil wrong, and you can be sued for doing it even if you did not cause any damage by trespassing.

The most common example of trespass is when you go onto someone's land without their permission. It is also trespass to dump rubbish on someone else's land. Land includes everything above and below the ground, so you might be trespassing if you burrow under someone else's land.

To bring an action against someone for trespass, you have to show that you have a right to exclusive possession (rather than ownership) of the land on which the trespass occurred.

Signs that have the words "Trespassers will be prosecuted" written on them are not strictly accurate. Technically you can only be prosecuted if you commit a crime.

The crime of trespass is dealt with under section 9 of the SOA. A person can be guilty of trespass if they:

◾trespass in a "public place" and neglect or refuse to leave after being warned;
◾enter a "private place" or "scheduled public place" without express authority unless for a legitimate purpose; or
◾neglect or refuse to leave a "private place" or a "scheduled public place" after being given a warning and do not have a lawful excuse.

The terms "public place" and "scheduled public place" are defined in section 3 of the SOA.

WHAT YOU CAN DO

You are allowed to eject a person who comes onto your land without your permission. You must not use any more force than is reasonably necessary to do this. Obviously you should first ask the person to leave before you consider any more drastic action. If you use too much force, you may be guilty of assault and could be committing a crime or be sued for damages for any injuries the "trespasser" suffers as a result of your actions.

WHAT A COURT CAN DO

If you can convince a court that someone has trespassed on your property, it can order the trespasser:

1.to stop trespassing now, and to never trespass again (this is an injunction); and/or
2.to pay you compensation.

If a trespasser claims to be entitled to stay on your land, you can ask the Court to decide if this claim is valid and, if it is not, to give you a writ for possession.

WHEN YOU CAN TRESPASS

If someone sues you for trespass you may have a defence if any of the following has occurred:

1.you were on the land with the permission of the person who is suing you;
2.you have been authorised by some law to go onto the land (see "Officials on your land", below, for examples);
3.you have gone onto the land to stop a nuisance (see: "Nuisance", above); or
4.you have gone onto the land to get back goods that belong to you. This only applies if the goods have been put there by or with the help of the person on the land or someone who has stolen the goods.

Officials on your land

The law allows some people to come onto your land without your permission.

POLICE

Police are allowed onto your land if they have a warrant, which they should show you when seeking entry to your land. If they don't have a warrant, they may only enter your land if you invite them, or if particular circumstances arise, such as making an arrest, stopping a breach of the peace or ensuring that the SOA is being complied with (see: "Power to search without warrant", in Chapter 3*2 Arrest and Interrogation).

METER READERS AND OTHERS

Gas, water and electricity meter readers, post office officials, health officers, and council officers are also allowed to come onto your property. All of these people should show you some proof of identity, and are allowed onto your land only for specific purposes related to their jobs.

Licensed surveyors (and people acting under their direction and supervision) are also permitted onto your land for the purpose of carrying out a survey. Even then, there are restrictions as to giving notice and the time at which entry is permitted.

FIRE BRIGADE

The fire brigade can come onto your property and do whatever it thinks is necessary to stop a fire, including deliberately damaging your property. No one else is allowed to cause any damage to your property.
Civil Trespass

Even if you do not harm another person’s property nor intend to harm the property, you can still be charged with civil trespass if you simply set foot on the premises without permission. You may be held liable for any damages that occur, such as stepping on flowers in someone’s garden. Normally, civil trespass is a minor crime punishable by a nominal fine.

Criminal Trespass

The definition of criminal trespassing varies from state to state. Generally, though, someone can commit this crime if they enter a property without permission or remain on the property without consent from the owner. Criminal trespass often involves violence to people on the property or the property itself. In some states, it counts as criminal trespassing if someone ignores warning signs, locks, fences, and other barriers to unwanted entry.

Similar Documents

Premium Essay

Tort Law in Construction

...(119324) Yeow Jun Heng (119383) Submitted to : Date : 1st December 2014 Content Introduction- Tort Law…………………………………………..................................3 Trespass……………………………………………………………………………..4-6 Nuisance…………………………………………………………………………....7-12 Negligence………………………………………………………………………..13-14 Distinguishing nuisance and trespassing to land……………………………………15 Distinguishing nuisance and negligence…………………………………………16-17 Discussion……………………………………………………………………………18 Reference…………………………………………………………………………......19 INTRODUCTION Tort Law Tort law is a body of rights, obligations and remedies that is applied by courts in civil proceedings to provide relief for persons who have suffered harm from the wrongful acts of others. The person who sustains injury or suffers pecuniary damage as the result of tortious conduct is known as the plaintiff, and the person who is responsible for inflicting the injury and incurs liability for the damage is known as the defendant or tortfeasor. Tort denotes a breach of duty imposed by law. The nature of the duty is to act as a reasonable person exercising reasonable diligence. Tort exceeds the obligation of a party under contract. The duty could be to the other party in a contractual relationship, as well as to any third party who, it is reasonably foreseeable, would get affected by the actions of a persons. There are three constituents of tort: 1. There must be a wrongful act committed by a person. 2. The wrongful act must give rise to...

Words: 4233 - Pages: 17

Premium Essay

Business Law Outline

...B-Law outline #3 Aaron Stewart Tort law * Intentional torts * Assault, battery, False Imprisonment Intentional Inflicktion of Emotional Distress, trespass to land, trespass to Chattels( personal Property), Conversion * Defenses to Intentional Torts * Self Defense, Defense to all others, Defense of Property, Recovery of Personal Property, Necessity, Consent * Assault * Assault occurs when one person intentionally causes another person to suffer a reasonable apprehension of imminent harmful of offensive bodily contact(Resonable-objective standard) * Elements of Assault (Manning v. Grimsley)(Wishnatsky v. Huey)(Howard v. Wilson) * Intent, Reasonable Apprehension, Imminent * Battery * Intentional Infliction of harmful or offensive bodily contact * Elements of battery (England v. S&M Foods) * Intent, Harmful or offensive, Bodily contact * False Imprisonment * Intentional infliction of a confinement * Elements of False Imprisonment (K-Mart v. Perdue)(Bank v. Fritsch)( Pope v. Rostraver Shop and Save) * Intent, confinement * Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress * Intentional infliction, by extreme & outrageous conduct of service emotional Distress * Elements (Intent, Extreme & outrageous conduct, Severe Emotional Distress) * Transferred Intent Doctrine * The differnet person is the object of Intent if D had “intent” with respect to one...

Words: 461 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Legal Writing

...Tort Issues Whether Barb committed any intentional Tort against Carol I. Whether Carol can seeks recovery for  [4] a temporary trespass or nuisance (asserting claims for annoyance, discomfort, inconvenience, interference with their enjoyment of their property, loss of enjoyment of life, and personal injury. II. Whether Carol can maintain an cause of action for negligence or any other intentional tort, due to her contention that that offensive smoke have migrated from a neighbor's property onto the plaintiff's property or is the plaintiff limited to remedies under trespass and nuisance? Rule(s) of Law 1. Trespass Land: Defined: The Restatement (2nd) of Torts, section 329, states: A trespasser is a person who enters or remains upon land in the possession of another without a privilege to do so created by the possessor's consent or otherwise The traditional common law rule,-the dimensional test, provides that a trespass only exists where the invasion of land occurs through a physical, tangible object. See Adams v. Cleveland-Cliffs Iron Co., 237 Mich. App. 51, 602 N.W.2d 215, 219 (Mich. Ct. App. 1999). Under that rule, intangible matter or energy, such as smoke, noise, light, and vibration, are insufficient to constitute a trespass. Id.; Larry D. Scheafer, Annotation, Recovery in Trespass for Injury to Land Caused by Airborne Pollutants, 2 A.L.R. 4th 1054. 2. [23] Nuisance Defined: Restatement §822 defines a private nuisance as a substantial non-trespassory...

Words: 4044 - Pages: 17

Premium Essay

Intentive, Motive and Malice

...The essay will discuss the meanings of intention, motive and malice as used in the law of torts. The law of tort is concerned with civil wrongs, in the sense that a wrong or tort is committed against an individual (which includes legal entities such as companies) rather than the state. The importance of the Law of tort is that individuals have certain interests or rights which are protected by Law. These interests are protected by a court awarding a sum of money, known as damages, for infringement of ones rights. Alternatively, by the issuing of an injunction, which is a court order, to the defendant to refrain from doing something. It is important to take note of the Latin words, damnum and injuria as used in tort. Damnum means damage caused or suffered, and injuria means a right of action or claim. This is because there are some cases in which the defendant’s act or omission may have infringed or caused damage to the claimant but the claimant may have no action as the interest affected may not be one protected by Law. In Law this position is referred to as damnum sine injuria meaning damage suffered without violation of a legal right. For example; A opens a fish and chips shop in the same street as B’s fish and chips shop. A reduces his prices with the intention of putting B out of business. A has committed no tort as losses caused by lawful business competition are not actionable in tort On the other hand, there are also cases where the defendant’s act or omission causes...

Words: 2444 - Pages: 10

Premium Essay

Torrt Vs Tort Law

...INTRODUCTION The word ‘Tort’ has been derived from a Latin word ‘Tortum’ which means crooked or twisted act. This word is a French equivalent of English word wrong and of the Roman law term ‘delict’. It is a civil wrong independent of contract for which the appropriate remedy is action for unliquidated damages. Person committing a tort is called tortfeasor and the act is called tortious act. In this piece of research project, we will analyze which one is more authentic or valid, whether law tort or law of torts. Jurists have debated this question for a long time. It is generally asked in the form, “is there a law of tort or only a law of torts?” Those who call it Law of Tort (Winfield) base their understanding on the Latin maxim ‘ubi...

Words: 1604 - Pages: 7

Premium Essay

Torts Case Study

...Trespass has been said to be one of the most ancient form of torts. It developed even before the presence of the police force, to provide protection against the physical interference to person, land or property. The statement has made specific reference to the tort of trespass to person, in regards to the extent of intention needed to determine that a trespass to person has occurred. As such this essay will examine the tort of trespass, with reference to both UK and Malaysian cases in order to make that determination. It will then conclude. As mentioned before trespass may take three forms. The focus here will be on the trespass to person. All three forms of torts, it should be noted, are actionable per se, meaning that the claimant may not...

Words: 2374 - Pages: 10

Premium Essay

Ding

...offense involving unlawful physical contact, distinct from assault which is the apprehension, not fear, of such contact. Assault In common law, assault is an act which causes a person to apprehend immediate unlawful person violence. An assault is carried out by a threat of bodily harm coupled with an apparent, present ability to cause the harm. It is both a crime and a tort and, therefore, may result in either criminal and/or civil liability False imprisonment False imprisonment is a restraint of a person in a bounded area without justification or consent. False imprisonment is a common-law felony and a tort. It applies to private as well as governmental detention. When it comes to public police, the proving of false imprisonment is sufficient to obtain a writ of habeas corpus. Libel/Slander Under common law, to constitute defamation, a claim must generally be false and have been made to someone other than the person defamed. Some common law jurisdictions also distinguish between spoken defamation, called slander, and defamation in other media such as printed words or images, called libel. Conversion A conversion is a voluntary act by one person inconsistent with the ownership rights of another. Trespass Trespass is an area of tort law broadly divided into three groups: trespass to the person, trespass to chattels and trespass to land. Private Nuisance An activity or thing that interferes with the use of property by an individual (or a few individuals) by being irritating...

Words: 626 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Tort Law Case Study

...NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY ODISHA YEAR:2014-15 LAW OF TORTS DEVELOPMENT OF LAW OF TORTS IN INDIA AND ENGLAND NAME : AMAN RAJ SINGH BA-LLB( Hons.) BATCH OF 2014-19 GUIDED BY: PROF. B.HYDERVALI Acknowledgement For this academic endeavour, which in its pursuit has been a very insightful and fruitful project, I have many to express my gratitude to. Primarily, I would like to thank my subject professor, Professor B.Hydervali, Law of Tort, for assigning me this paper to write. Had the opportunity not come across via him, I would not have delved into this ambit of Tort Law and gained further insight into the human condition. Further, I would like to thank Mr.Rajesh Kumar Singh, my father, mentor and continual, irreplaceable support system, for sustaining my spirits and my self esteem, throughout not only this project but also life in general. For if it weren’t for him, I would always been in vain fear of failure and giving up would have become an option. Lastly, I would like to thank my wide expanse of friends and peers, each a different colour and genre in personality and each...

Words: 3152 - Pages: 13

Premium Essay

Law 122 Notes

...Week 1- Law 122 : Why study law  1. Business decisions have legal consequences which affect profits and losses:  * Some decisions impose liability, others create opportunities   * Negative: dumping pollutants into environment   * Positive: binding contractual party to promise   2. Risk mgmt. tool: Law sets the framework for risk, it gives you tools to manage the risk  * Ex. Insurance, exclusion and limitation clauses, incorporation     Dimensions of course   1. 2. Risk mgmt.  3. Legal reasoning: rules and analysis   4. Law/ moral dimensions     What is law?  * A set of principle and rules that courts will enforce   * A way of thinking (or reasoning) about these principles and rules better description. Process determines legal reasoning   * It is not just the result of a case that matters. The reasons for the result are where law happens. Law is bound up in the reasoning. So it is important to ask “why” and “how” not just “who won”.     Law vs. Mortality   Law: formally sanctioned, illegal behaviour    Morality: informally sanctioned, moral behaviour   1. 2. Immoral but not illegal  * Lying to friends  3. Immoral and illegal  * murder   4. Moral but illegal     Ethical perspective 1.1 pg.6   Can I watch someone drop without incurring legal liability?  If I can legally do it,should i?  Ethically is it okay?    Ethical reasoning:  * Focus on why something is ethically right or wrong...

Words: 5644 - Pages: 23

Premium Essay

Classifications of Law

...The Classification and Sources of Law The word law can be defined in many ways, because its purpose or function is defined by the way in which it is viewed. When the expression law is used in terms of the land it is considered strict and stern. The law is put in place to have rule in the lad, Guide the human population on how to conduct oneself and give justice to those wronged. Law can be categorized in many categories, but is Classified into three main categories: * Criminal and Civil Law * Public and Private Law * Substantive and Procedural Law Civil Law According to Canadian Superior Courts Judges Association (CSCJA) civil law deals with disputes between parties, or negligent acts that cause harm to others. There is not much evidence needed to uphold a civil claim, but balance of probabilities. Civil law is classified in several groups: The Law of Tort- a tort is defined as a civil wrong; a tort is a remedy to individuals who have been wronged or harmed by obstructive actions of others. Torts laws are separated into main components Nuisance, Negligence, Defamation and Trespass. There are two types of nuisance, public nuisance and private nuisance. Legal institute states that “A public nuisance is when a person unreasonably interferes with a right that the general public shares in common” and “A private nuisance is when the plaintiff's use and enjoyment of her land is interfered with substantially and unreasonably through a thing or activity.” Negligence...

Words: 892 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Rules of Law

...Offering or receiving something of value to influence a person in the performance of an official duty. 8. Rule of law:Crime: R.I.C.O Under the RICO it is a federal crime for any person to use income derived from a pattern of racketeering activity to acquire an interest in a enterprise. 9. Rule of Law: Intentional Torts: Battery A battery is the intentional and harmful or offensive touching of another without consent. 10. Rule of law: Intentional Torts: Assualt Is placing a person in immediate apprehension of one's physical safety. 11. Rule of Law:Intentional Torts: Assault/Battery Defenses o 1. Self defense is defending yourself and a third party using only enough force that is necessary. o 2. Discipline is a parent using enough force that is reasonable and necessary. 12. Rule of Law: Intentional Torts: False Imprisonment:Defense o False imprisonment is the intentional confinement of another person for an appreciable time without consent. o Defense: Consent 13. Rule of law:Intentional Torts: Defamation of Character Defamation of character is publication of a false statement about a person that brings one into hatred, ridicule or contempt. 14. Rule of Law: Intentional Torts: Defamation of Character: Defense. o 1.)The truth o 2.)Must be communicated to a third party. o 3.).Absolute Privilege like a judge during a court session. o 4.) Conditional Privilege which means that whatever is said must...

Words: 988 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Paper

...not hit a different boy. The trial court entered judgment for Talmage and Smith appealed on the grounds that he did not have the intent to hit Talmage and was therefore not liable for battery. Issue: If an actor intends to inflict an intentional tort upon one party and accidentally harms a second party, can the actor be held liable to the second party for battery? Holding and Rule: Yes. If an actor intends to inflict an intentional tort upon one party and accidentally harms a second party, the actor can be held liable to the second party for battery under the doctrine of transferred intent. If an actor intends an act against a party and that act impacts upon another the actor is liable for the injuries suffered. The fact that the injury resulted to a party other than was intended does not relieve the defendant from responsibility. Smith will not be relieved of liability because he intended to injure someone else. Disposition: Affirmed. Effect on Business and Society: The transferred intent torts under common law are: assault, battery, false imprisonment, trespass to land, and trespass to chattels. If an actor has the intent to commit any of the transferred intent torts, the actor will be liable for all other transferred intent torts that result from that act. The actor’s liability extends to all parties harmed, not merely the original intended...

Words: 329 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Nominal Damages Case Study

...down to being merely nominal. The law has not laid down that what shall be the measure of damages in actions of torts; the measure is vague and uncertain, depending upon a vast variety of causes, facts and circumstances. There are four kinds of damages: a. Contemptuous Damages – These are awarded when it is considered that an action should never have been brought. When the plantiff has technically a legal claim but there is no moral justification for it or he morally deserved what the defendant did to him, the court may award a half penny or a paisa showing its disapproval of the conduct of the plantiff. b. Nominal Damages – These are awarded where the purpose of the action is merely to establish a right, no substantial harm or loss having been suffered, for eg., in cases of infringement of absolute rights of personal security (e.g. assault) and property (e.g. bare trespass, invasion of a right of easement, etc.). Nominal damages are so called because they bear no relation even to the cost and trouble of suing, and the sum awarded is so small that it may be said to have “no exsistence in point of quantity.” c....

Words: 1078 - Pages: 5

Free Essay

Ebay V. Bidders Edge

...Individual Project William Hurley Legal and Ethical Environments of Business INTRODUCTION Today’s topic is on is on the subject of linking and when is it trespassing. Linking is a common practice where one web page or site links up with another web page or site. I sent an email about eBay Inc v. Bidders Edge Inc to a friend. She wants to design an internet dating site and doesn’t want to be involved in any illegal complications. After reading my email she responded with some questions about how she could accomplish that. She wants to know what Bidders Edge does that is different than eBay’s normal customers. Why does it matter to eBay? What is the definition of traditional trespass to personal property? Does the definition of trespass to personal property in your text differ from the California definition of trespass to computer services? How? I will do my best to respond to all of her questions. EBAY V. BIDDERS EDGE Bidder’s Edge is an auction aggregation site designed to offer on-line auction buyers the ability to search for items across numerous on-line auctions without having to search each host site individually. ( www.tomwbell.com) EBay is a person to person trading site. On eBay people put items up for auction and other people bid on these items. Basically, Bidders edge would crawl onto different auction sites and obtain information on items for their customers to bid on. Bidder’s edge customers would not have to search a bunch of different sites to get the same information...

Words: 708 - Pages: 3

Free Essay

Whats Up

... The Grinch’s main goal was to sabotage Christmas, as the story begins with the Grinch saying "I must find some way to keep Christmas from coming!”. This was just the start of the Grinch’s conspiracy to trespass and commit burglary on the homes of the people in Whoville. The Grinch committed his act of conspiracy when he spoke of his plan to max, “"I know just what to do!" The Grinch laughed in his throat. "I'll make a quick Santa Claus hat and a coat."” With the intentions of pretending to be Santa as he broke into the Whoville homes. This is when The Grinch’s Burglary began. The Grinch then committed his first act of Larceny by stealing the Christmas stockings, “"These stockings," he grinched, "are the first things to go!"”. It didn’t stop there, the Grinch continued to fill his sack with more and more items from the Whoville homes. The Grinch made this statement about his bag “Packed it up with their presents, their ribbons, their wrappings, their snoof and their fuzzles, their tringlers and trappings!”. 2) ISSUE PRESENTED: Under Criminal Law, is the defendant “The Grinch” guilty of Larceny Conspiracy to Trespass and Burglary? Under Tort Law, can the plaintiff People of Whoville sue for Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress? 3) ARGUMENTS: Under criminal law a defendant is guilty of conspiracy if an agreement between two or more persons to engage jointly in an unlawful or criminal act, or an act that is innocent in itself but becomes unlawful when done by the...

Words: 774 - Pages: 4