What is land?

Question 1

What is the main statute?

Answer 1

Law of Property Act 1925

Question 2

what does ‘cuius est solum euis usque ad coelm et ad inferos’ mean?

Answer 2

‘he who owns the land owns everything reaching up to the very heavens and down to the depths of the earth’

Question 3

The main case for this topic and the legal principle

Answer 3

Bocardo SA v Star Energy UK Ltd [2009] - the petroleum products belonged to the state but not the subsoil, so it was not trespassing to remove the petroleum but it was a trespass to drill wells beneath the claimant’s land without their permission.

Question 4

What is the legal principle of Grigsby v Melville [1974]

Answer 4

A person who owns the land owns everything below and above it

Question 5

What is the legal principle of Lord Bernstein v Skyviews & General Ltd [1978] and the Judge who made it

Answer 5

Griffiths J stated - the rights of the owner extend to a height that is necessary for the ordinary enjoyment and use of their land and the structures on it.

Question 6

What is the s205 LPA 1925 definition of land?

Answer 6

Land includes any mines and minerals, whether held apart from the surface, buildings or parts of buildings, and other corporeal and incorporeal hereditaments.

Question 7

Explain subterranean spaces

Answer 7

The landowner owns the subterranean space below the surface of his land. He can dig down into it to form a cellar or underground room.

Question 8

When doesn’t subterranean space not belong to the landowner and case examples & legislation

Answer 8

Certain mines and minerals do not belong to the landowner but to the state.

• gold and silver belong to the Crown - Case of Mines [1567]
• The crown is also entitled to oil, petroleum, coal and natural gas - Coal Industry Act 1994 & Petroleum Act 1998
• Crown has the right to treasure found in the land

Question 9

What is the modern definition of airspace and example case

Answer 9

The owner of land owns the airspace above that land—but he or she does not own ‘up to the very heavens’ - B

Lord Bernstein v Skyviews [1978] - aircraft flying at normal height is not considered a trespass on land

Question 10

Legal principle of Kelson v Imperial Tobacco Co [1957]

Answer 10

McNair J held that the sign was a trespass to the claimant’s airspace and granted them an injunction for the removal of the sign

Question 11

Legal principle of John Trenberth v National Westminster Bank [1979]

Answer 11

Claimant refused to allow scaffolding to be erected on his adjacent land but the defendant proceeded anyway so the claimant was granted an injunction to prevent this.

Question 12

What are corporeal hereditaments?

Answer 12

Tangible and visible objects e.g., houses

Question 13

What are incorporeal hereditaments?

Answer 13

Intangible objects e.g., easements

Question 14

Legal principle of Laiquat v Majid [2005]

Answer 14

Silber J relying on Kelson v Imperial Tobacco Co [1957] held it was a trespass into the claimant’s airspace. It was well within the height that the older authorities considered a trespass and it did not matter that the fan had not actually interfered with the claimant’s normal use of his garden.

Question 15

Remedies for when there is no damage

Answer 15

the only remedy available to a claimant is an injunction and on the nature of the claim and the fact that trespass was occurring, an injunction ought to be granted.

Question 16

Legal test for Holland v Hodgson and other cases that relied on the test from Holland and their principles

Answer 16

1) degree of annexation - is it fixed or not?
2) the purpose of annexation - to enhance the land or to enjoy the object?

• D’Eyncourt v Gregory [1866] - sculptures rested by their own weight were held to form architectural design for the hall in which they were placed and so fell to be treated as part of the freehold
• Elitestone v Morris [1997] - whether a structure could be removed from the land without being demolished was of significant importance when deciding whether a structure was a fixture or a chattel
• TSB v Botham [1996] - if the item is viewed objectively it is intended to be a permanent improvement to the building, it is to be a fixture. If the attachment is temporary and is not more than to be used and enjoyed it is a chattel
• Mew v Tristmere [2017] - boats remained a chattel as they could have been removed and had always been treated as chattels sold by one owner to the next

Question 17

What are the basic principles for items found in or on the land and what is the one legislation for things found in or on land

Answer 17

On the land - Armory v Delamirie [1722] - a person who finds a chattel has a good claim against the world except for the true owner

In the land - South Staffordshire Water Co v Sharman [1896] - where a person has control over land and has the intention to prevent interference from others, any objects found on land will be presumed to be in possession of the owner regardless of whether the item was found by an employee or stranger

Elwes v Briggs Gas Company [1866] - a prehistoric boat was found by the tenants 6ft below the surface of the land and the court held that the boat belonged to the landowner.

Moffat v Kazana [1969] - the true owner of an object has better claim over the found property than anybody else. If a true owner cannot be found the person who has the strongest claim depends on where the property was found.

Waverley Borough Council v Fletcher [1996] - Fletcher maintained that a common principle applies to objects in or unattached to land to overcome a finder’s claim the owner or lawful possessor of land must demonstrate an intention to exercise control over the land and things found on or in it.

Treasure Act 1996