Law of finding

Question 1

Ewles v Briggs

Answer 1

Objects found beneath the surface belong to the legal owner of the land on which they were found. The act of finding is itself a trespass. Ownership of land entails ownership of the subsoil.

Here land had been leased to a gas company whose employees dug up a wooden boat.

Question 2

Armory v Delamire

Answer 2

Chimney sweep who found a valuable jewel in a chimney. Jeweller, a miser, would not return it. Court held that the chimney sweep had the better title.

The arrangement was one of bailment: jeweller was a bailee who had an obligation to return the object to bailor at his request.

Question 3

Hanna v Peel

Answer 3

A soldier (Plaintiff) found a brooch in a house. The true owner was not known and the defendant never occupied his house.

Held: soldier’s rights are superior to everyone but the true owner. Distinguished Ewles v Briggs–chattel here was found above the surface, and the finder had the required intention to possess, not the owner of the unoccupied house.

Question 4

Parker v Ryanair

Answer 4

Leading authority.
Gold bracelet found on the floor of the passenger lounge in Heathrow Airport.

Following Hanna v Peel, the Court of Appeal held that an object found on the surface where the landowner has not exercised sufficient control or intention to possess, the finder has the better title.

Whether chattel is on the surface or below is a question of fact.

Question 5

Webb v Ireland

Answer 5

Derrynaflan Hoard. “Treated honourably” by Directer of the National Museum.

State purchased the interest of the landowners for £25,000.

Blayney J in IEHC found that the state was a bailee and that the state had no treasure trove prerogative (following Byrne v Ireland).

In the IESC, a majority ruling overturned and found that the sovereignty of the state ensured its possession of archaeological objects. Webbs were paid £25,000. Unsatisfactory reasoning? (Kelly’s historical argument, cf. Costello)

Question 6

Archaelogical finds in Ireland today (statute)

Answer 6

S. 96 Historical and Archaeological and Heritage and Miscellaneous Proviosions Act 2023.

State has an “absolute and immediate right to the possession of the object.”

Discretionary power in the director of the museum to make wards but no legitimate expectation.