trespass to goods notes book Flashcards
what is the tort of trespass to goods???
the wrongful physical ingterference with the possession of chattles
what are chattels???
Chattels are movable, tangible articles of property.
can take many forms eg scratching vehicle, removing tyre or causing intentional damage to personal property.
case where a chattel was taken out of the possession of another
Brewer v Dew
case of asportation (moving a chattel form one place to another)
Kirk v Gregory
Case of damaging a chattel with one’s person
Fouldes vWilloughby
Case dealing wiht damaging chattel with one’s property
M’Cormick v Ballantine
Case where animal is beaten
Slater v Swann
Case where animal is killed
Sheldrick v Abery
Elements of the Tort of Trespass to Goods
identified in Farrel v Minister for Agriculture and Food
-wrongful and direct interference with the possession of chattels (per Carroll j)
Interference must be direct
if not= no trespass (Covell v Laming
if a room in which P goods are kept are locked by D=no trespass (Hartley v Moxham)
If a vehicle is wheel clamped unlawfully =trespass (Vine v Waltham Forest)
Kirk v Gregory- women moved rings from man who just dies from one room in his house to another held liable
sharp focus on being direct in McDonagh v West of Ireland Fisheries- D not liable for temp moving boat and boat was later damaged but was not direct so no action
Where does directness end and indirectness begin??
mixing a drug with feed of a racehorse= trespass to feed but not racehorse when later given feed
laying of poison=not direct= no trespass
(Hutchens v Maughan)
Whinfield suggests chasing animals is probs trespass- gains some support from Farmer v Hunt and Durant v Childe
trespass to goods is actionable per se
trespass is generally actionable per se- no reason to say goods is different
Must P be in Possession???
since its an interference with possession, it follows that if the P were not in possession at the time of the interference, he cannot sue for trespass- P must be exercising physical control- whether they own them or not is irrelevant
-Keenan Bros Ltd v CIE- held would be an act of trespass for any perosn to opne D wagon to remove the goods unless by vrtrue of D permission or by legal right- fact that goods belonged to P did nto alter or entitle them to commit an act of trespass to recover goods
Position on D state of mind???
-no liability in respect of act neither intentional or neg
-trespass must be wilful or neg confirmed in ESB v Hastings- D made aware by P of presence of cable- held put D “on notice sufficiently to render then liable for trespass
approach adopted in National Coal Board v Evans and Fowler v Lanning
Trespass to goods and lawful authority
-circumstances wher act done by a person would otherwise constitute a trespass to goods will be rendered innocent because that person has lawful authority to do the act
-Gardai if they belive good to be unlawfully in possession or stolen (Jennings v Quinn)
number of stat provisions that authorise Gardai to seize goods in certain circumstances.
what is the tort of detinue??
when you wrongfully retain something which is in the possession of another after he has requested its return
remedies include value of the chattel and damages, return of chattel or its value, for return and damages
what is the tort of conversion??
wrongfully denying someone’s rightful title to goods ( by taking possession, abusing possession or denying tite (eg sale of an item)
Trespass to chattels definition
Deliberate use of otherwise interference with a chattell in the possession of another without lawful authority
actionable per say
in jurisdictions in US and NZ, some proof of damge is needed but no in Ireland and UK although McM and B state it is idfficiult to support the taking of an action where no financial or psychological damages was caused.
what constitutes intereference???
touching anothers property may suffice, moving it, damaging it, taking it out of owners possession
possession of another person’s goods…
-law is not concerned with protecting those in ownership but rather those in possession ie an action may lie against the owner where they exceed their lawful authority over a good eg (Keenan Bros v CIE)
Position of Chattels found
Webb v Ireland
-true owner has superior right
-owner of land on which property is found will have superior right, accepted where item was attached to land, under land, or partially submerged
-if found ON land and not clear if owner asserted a claim, then finder may have right if he was lawfully on the land at time he found it.
Here, they became trespassers ab initio when they started to dig as they exceeded their right to be there
can spam emails be trespass to chattels
Thrifty Tel Inc v Bezenek- held hacking can be dealt with under trespass to chattels.
sedning unsolicited emails if a trespass- CompuServe Inc v Cyber Promotions
