Misplaced Pages

#476523

58-431: A fence is a barrier enclosing or bordering a field, yard, etc., usually made of posts and wire or wood, used to prevent entrance, to confine, or to mark a boundary. Fence or fences may also refer to: Fence Alternatives to fencing include a ditch (sometimes filled with water , forming a moat ). A balustrade or railing is a fence to prevent people from falling over an edge, most commonly found on

116-399: A stairway , landing, or balcony . Railing systems and balustrades are also used along roofs , bridges , cliffs, pits, and bodies of water. Another aim of using fence is to limit the intrusion attempt into a property by malicious intruders. In support of these barriers there are sophisticated technologies that can be applied on fence itself and strengthen the defence of territory reducing

174-476: A cause of action. Incongruity of a defendant's language and action, or of a plaintiff's perception and reality may vitiate an assault claim. In Tuberville v Savage , the defendant reached for his sword and told the plaintiff that " [i]f it were not assize-time , I would not take such language from you". In its American counterpart, Commonwealth v. Eyre , the defendant shouted " [i]f it were not for your gray hairs, I would tear your heart out". In both cases,

232-451: A child who has misbehaved" and the defendant " exercise[d] prudence and restraint". Unreasonable punishments, such as violently grabbing a student's arm and hair, have no defense. Many jurisdictions, however, limit corporal punishment to parents, and a few, such as New Zealand , have criminalized the practice. Perhaps the most common defense for the torts of trespass to the person is that of volenti non fit injuria , literally, "to

290-402: A defense to mutual combat and instead provide relief under the doctrine of comparative negligence. Medical care gives rise to many claims of trespass to the person. A physician, "treating a mentally competent adult under non-emergency circumstances, cannot properly undertake to perform surgery or administer other therapy without the prior consent of his patient". Should he do so, he commits

348-473: A fence on a boundary varies. The last relevant original title deed (s) and a completed seller's property information form may document which side has to put up and has installed any fence respectively; the first using "T" marks/symbols (the side with the "T" denotes the owner); the latter by a ticked box to the best of the last owner's belief with no duty, as the conventionally agreed conveyancing process stresses, to make any detailed, protracted enquiry. Commonly

406-481: A fine of up to £1000. Distinctly different land ownership and fencing patterns arose in the eastern and western United States. Original fence laws on the east coast were based on the British common law system, and rapidly increasing population quickly resulted in laws requiring livestock to be fenced in. In the west, land ownership patterns and policies reflected a strong influence of Spanish law and tradition, plus

464-628: A form of " griefing ", may make trespass to chattel an attractive remedy for deleted, stolen, or corrupted virtual property. Trespass to land involves the "wrongful interference with one's possessory rights in [real] property". 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, British courts have held liability holds for trespass committed negligently. Similarly, some American courts will find liability for unintentional intrusions only where such intrusions arise under circumstances evincing negligence or involve

522-527: A highly dangerous activity. Exceptions exist for entering land adjoining a road unintentionally (such as in a car accident), as in River Wear Commissioners v Adamson . In some jurisdictions, trespass while in possession of a firearm, which may include a low-power air weapon without ammunition, constitutes a more grave crime of armed trespass. Aside from the surface, land includes the subsoil , airspace and anything permanently attached to

580-554: A nature as to excite an apprehension of battery [bodily injury]". In some jurisdictions, there is no requirement that actual physical violence result—simply the "threat of unwanted touching of the victim" suffices to sustain an assault claim. Consequently, in R v Constanza , the court found a stalker's threats could constitute assault. Similarly, silence, given certain conditions, may constitute an assault as well. However, in other jurisdictions, simple threats are insufficient; they must be accompanied by an action or condition to trigger

638-448: A purely common law remedy, the scope of which varies by jurisdiction. Generally, trespass to chattels possesses three elements: Remedies for trespass to chattel include damages, liability for conversion, and injunction, depending on the nature of the interference. Trespass to chattels typically applies to tangible property and allows the owner of such property to seek relief when a third party intentionally interferes or intermeddles in

SECTION 10

#1732788073477

696-401: A rural fence or hedge has (or in some cases had) an adjacent ditch, the ditch is normally in the same ownership as the hedge or fence, with the ownership boundary being the edge of the ditch furthest from the fence or hedge. The principle of this rule is that an owner digging a boundary ditch will normally dig it up to the very edge of their land, and must then pile the spoil on their own side of

754-481: A total for administrative units not to confirm the actual size of holdings, a rare instance where Ordnance Survey maps often provide more than circumstantial evidence namely as to which feature is to be considered the boundary. On private land in the United Kingdom , it is the landowner's responsibility to fence their livestock in. Conversely, for common land , it is the surrounding landowners' duty to fence

812-457: A trespass to the person and is liable for damages. However, if the plaintiff is informed by a doctor of the broad risks of a medical procedure, there will be no claim under trespass against the person for resulting harm caused; the plaintiff's agreement constitutes informed consent . In those cases where the patient does not possess sufficient mental capacity to consent, doctors must exercise extreme caution. In F v West Berkshire Health Authority ,

870-451: A trespass to use that road if the road is constructed with a public use easement , or if, by owner acquiescence or through adverse possession , the road has undergone a common law dedication to the public. In Hickman v Maisey and Adams v. Rivers , the courts established that any use of a road that went beyond using it for its normal purpose could constitute a trespass: " [a]lthough a land owner's property rights may be [s]ubject to

928-466: A willing person, no injury is done", but shortened to "consensual privilege" or "consent". If a plaintiff participates in a sporting activity in which physical contact is ordinary conduct, such as rugby, they are considered to have consented. This is not the case if the physical contact went beyond what could be expected, such as the use of hand gun during a fistfight, as in Andrepont v Naquin , or where

986-455: Is a valid defense to trespasses against the person, assuming that it constituted the use of " reasonable force which they honestly and reasonably believe is necessary to protect themselves or someone else, or property". The force used must be proportionate to the threat, as ruled in Cockcroft v Smith . Trespass to chattels (also known as trespass to goods or trespass to personal property)

1044-457: Is an area of 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. Through the evolution of the common law in various jurisdictions, and the codification of common law torts, most jurisdictions now broadly recognize three trespasses to

1102-402: Is both a crime and a tort. Generally, a person commits criminal assault if they purposely, knowingly, or recklessly inflict bodily injury upon another; if they negligently inflict bodily injury upon another by means of dangerous weapon; or if through physical menace, they place another in fear of imminent serious bodily injury. A person commits tortious assault when they engage in "any act of such

1160-421: Is defined as " unlaw[ful] obstruct[ion] or depriv[ation] of freedom from restraint of movement". In some jurisdictions, false imprisonment is a tort of strict liability: no intention on the behalf of the defendant is needed, but others require an intent to cause the confinement. Physical force, however, is not a necessary element, and confinement need not be lengthy; the restraint must be complete, though

1218-524: Is defined as "an intentional interference with the possession of personal property...proximately caus[ing] injury". While originally a remedy for the asportation of personal property, the tort grew to incorporate any interference with the personal property of another. In some jurisdictions, such as the United Kingdom, trespass to chattels has been codified to clearly define the scope of the remedy; in most jurisdictions, trespass to chattel remains

SECTION 20

#1732788073477

1276-519: Is unavailable if the plaintiff is a tenant and the defendant a landlord who had no right to give the plaintiff his lease (e.g., an illegal apartment rental, an unauthorized sublet, etc.). Necessity is the situation in which it is vital to commit the trespass; in Esso Petroleum Co v Southport Corporation , the captain of a ship committed trespass by allowing oil to flood a shoreline. This was necessary to protect his ship and crew, however, and

1334-651: The Supreme Court of California held that a plaintiff must demonstrate either actual interference with the physical functionality of the computer system or the likelihood that such interference would occur in the future. The Hamidi decision quickly found acceptance at both the federal and state level. To date, no United States court has identified property rights in items acquired in virtual worlds; heretofore, virtual world providers have relied on end-user license agreements to govern user behavior. Nevertheless, as virtual worlds grow, incidents of property interference,

1392-565: The feudal system, most land in England was cultivated in common fields, where peasants were allocated strips of arable land that were used to support the needs of the local village or manor . By the sixteenth century the growth of population and prosperity provided incentives for landowners to use their land in more profitable ways, dispossessing the peasantry. Common fields were aggregated and enclosed by large and enterprising farmers—either through negotiation among one another or by lease from

1450-410: The "intermeddling with or use of … the personal property" of another gives cause of action for trespass. Since CompuServe Inc. v. Cyber Promotions, Inc. , various courts have applied the principles of trespass to chattel to resolve cases involving unsolicited bulk e-mail and unauthorized server usage. Trespass to land is today the tort most commonly associated with the term trespass ; it takes

1508-474: The House of Lords instructed British physicians that, to justify operating upon such an individual, there "(1) must ... be a necessity to act when it is not practicable to communicate with the assisted person ... [and] (2) the action taken must be such as a reasonable person would in all the circumstances take, acting in the best interests of the assisted person". Self-defense, or non-consensual privilege,

1566-524: The United States to cover intangible property , including combating the proliferation of unsolicited bulk email as well as virtual property interests in online worlds. In the late 1990s, American courts enlarged trespass to chattels, first to include the unauthorized use of long distance telephone lines, and later to include unsolicited bulk email. In 1998, a federal court in Virginia held that

1624-475: The United States, the American Law Institute's Restatement of Torts provides a general rule to determine liability for battery: An act which, directly or indirectly, is the legal cause of a harmful contact with another's person makes the actor liable to the other, if: Battery torts under Commonwealth precedent are subjected to a four point test to determine liability: False imprisonment

1682-559: The absence of intent, negligence is the appropriate tort. In other jurisdictions, gross negligence is sufficient to sustain a trespass to the person, such as when a defendant negligently operates an automobile and strikes the plaintiff with great force. "Intent is to be presumed from the act itself." Generally, and as defined by Goff LJ in Collins v Wilcock , trespass to the person consists of three torts: assault, battery, and false imprisonment. In various common law jurisdictions, assault

1740-413: The abuse of a right of entry, when a person who has the right to enter the land does something not covered by the permission. If the person has the right to enter the land but remains after this right expires, this is also trespass. It is also a trespass to throw anything on the land. For the purposes of trespass, the person who owns the land on which a road rests is treated as the owner; it is not, however,

1798-520: The common's livestock out such as in large parts of the New Forest . Large commons with livestock roaming have been greatly reduced by 18th and 19th century Acts for enclosure of commons covering most local units, with most remaining such land in the UK's National Parks. A 19th-century law requires railways to be fenced to keep people and livestock out. It is also illegal to trespass on railways, incurring

Fence (disambiguation) - Misplaced Pages Continue

1856-528: The courts held that despite a threatening gesture, the plaintiffs were not in immediate danger. The actions must give the plaintiff a reasonable expectation that the defendant is going to use violence; a fist raised before the plaintiff may suffice; the same fist raised behind the window of a police cruiser will not. Battery is "any intentional and unpermitted contact with the plaintiff's person or anything attached to it and practically identified with it". The elements of battery common law varies by jurisdiction. In

1914-401: The defendant needn't resist. Conveniently, the American Law Institute's Restatement (Second) of Torts distills false imprisonment liability analysis into a four-prong test: Depending on the jurisdiction, corporal punishment of children by parents or instructors may be a defense to trespass to the person, so long as the punishment was "reasonably necessary under the circumstances to discipline

1972-415: The ditch to avoid trespassing on their neighbour. They may then erect a fence or hedge on the spoil, leaving the ditch on its far side. Exceptions exist in law, for example where a plot of land derives from subdivision of a larger one along the centre line of a previously existing ditch or other feature, particularly where reinforced by historic parcel numbers with acreages beneath which were used to tally up

2030-559: The form of "wrongful interference with one's possessory rights in [real] property". Generally, it is not necessary to prove harm to a possessor's legally protected interest; liability for unintentional trespass varies by jurisdiction. " At common law, every unauthorized entry upon the soil of another was a trespasser "; however, under the tort scheme established by the Restatement of Torts , liability for unintentional intrusions arises only under circumstances evincing negligence or where

2088-519: The highway by reasonably impeding the primary right of the public to pass and repass; within these qualifications there is a public right of peaceful assembly on the highway." The principles established in Adams remain valid in American law. There are several defenses to trespass to land; license, justification by law, necessity and jus tertii . License is express or implied permission, given by

2146-574: The injuries were suffered not from the plaintiff's participation in the sport but inadequate safety measures taken, as in Watson v British Boxing Board of Control Ltd . Where the plaintiff and defendant voluntarily agree to participate in a fight, some jurisdictions will deny relief in civil action, so long as the injuries caused are proportionate: "in an ordinary fight with fists there is no cause of action to either of [the combatants] for any injury suffered". Other jurisdictions refuse to recognize consent as

2204-422: The intrusion involved a highly dangerous activity. Trespass has also been treated as a common law offense in some countries. There are three types of trespass, the first of which is trespass to the person. Whether intent is a necessary element of trespass to the person varies by jurisdiction. Under English decision, Letang v Cooper , intent is required to sustain a trespass to the person cause of action; in

2262-488: The land, such as houses, and other infrastructure, this is literally explained by the legal maxim quicquid plantatur solo, solo cedit . William Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England articulated the common law principle cuius est solum eius est usque ad coelum et ad inferos , translating from Latin as "for whoever owns the soil, it is theirs up to Heaven and down to Hell". In modern times, courts have limited

2320-480: The landlord—to maximize the productivity of the available land and contain livestock. Fences redefined the means by which land is used, resulting in the modern law of servitudes. In the United States, the earliest settlers claimed land by simply fencing it in. Later, as the American government formed, unsettled land became technically owned by the government and programs to register land ownership developed, usually making raw land available for low prices or for free, if

2378-475: The legal equivalent of " No Trespassing " signs. The laws are meant to spare landowners , particularly in rural areas, from having to continually replace printed signs that often end up being stolen or obliterated by the elements. The value of fences and the metaphorical significance of a fence, both positive and negative, has been extensively utilized throughout western culture. A few examples include: Notes Bibliography Trespass Trespass

Fence (disambiguation) - Misplaced Pages Continue

2436-409: The mesh or panelling is in mid-position. Otherwise it tends to be on non-owner's side so the fence owner might access the posts when repairs are needed but this is not a legal requirement. Where estate planners wish to entrench privacy a close-boarded fence or equivalent well-maintained hedge of a minimum height may be stipulated by deed. Beyond a standard height planning permission is necessary. Where

2494-461: The new millennium, trespass to chattel expanded beyond bulk email. In eBay v. Bidder's Edge , a California court ruled that Bidder's Edge's use of a web crawler to cull auction information from eBay's website constituted trespass to chattel and further, that a plaintiff in such a suit need not prove that the interference was substantial. A number of similar cases followed until, in Intel v. Hamidi ,

2552-732: The owner improved the property, including the construction of fences. However, the remaining vast tracts of unsettled land were often used as a commons, or, in the American West , " open range " as degradation of habitat developed due to overgrazing and a tragedy of the commons situation arose, common areas began to either be allocated to individual landowners via mechanisms such as the Homestead Act and Desert Land Act and fenced in, or, if kept in public hands, leased to individual users for limited purposes, with fences built to separate tracts of public and private land. Ownership of

2610-449: The owner of a marketing company committed trespass to chattels against an Internet service provider's computer network by sending 60 million unauthorized email advertisements after being notified that the spam was unauthorized. In America Online, Inc. v. LCGM, Inc. , AOL successfully sued a pornographic website for spamming AOL customers and forging the AOL domain name to trick customers. By

2668-641: The owner's possession of his personal property. "Interference" is often interpreted as the "taking" or "destroying" of goods, but can be as minor as "touching" or "moving" them in the right circumstances. In Kirk v Gregory , the defendant moved jewelry from one room to another, where it was stolen. The deceased owner's executor successfully sued her for trespass to chattel. Furthermore, personal property, as traditionally construed, includes living objects, except where property interests are restricted by law. Thus animals are personal property, but organs are not. In recent years, trespass to chattels has been expanded in

2726-458: The periphery of the universe— Cujus est solum ejus est usque ad coelum ", "every transcontinental flight would subject the operator to countless trespass suits". Citizens have a right to fly in the "navigable airspace". Thirty-one years later, in Bernstein of Leigh v Skyviews & General Ltd , an English court reached a similar conclusion, finding an action for trespass failed because

2784-421: The person: assault, which is "any act of such a nature as to excite an apprehension of battery"; battery, "any intentional and unpermitted contact with the plaintiff's person or anything attached to it and practically identified with it"; and false imprisonment, the " unlawful obstruction or deprivation of freedom from restraint of movement". Trespass to chattel does not require a showing of damages. Simply

2842-512: The police to enter land for the purposes of carrying out an arrest, or the California state constitution, which permits protests on grocery stores and strip malls, despite their presenting a general nuisance to store owners and patrons. Jus tertii is where the defendant can prove that the land is not possessed by the plaintiff, but by a third party, as in Doe d Carter v Barnard . This defense

2900-438: The possessor of land, to be on that land. These licenses are generally revocable unless there is contractual agreement preventing them being revoked. Once revoked, a license-holder becomes a trespasser if they remain on the land. Justification by law refers to those situations in which there is statutory authority permitting a person to go onto land, such as the England and Wales' Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 , which allows

2958-455: The right of absolute dominion over the subsurface. For instance, drilling a directional well that bottoms out beneath another's property to access oil and gas reserves is trespass, but a subsurface invasion by hydraulic fracturing is not. Where mineral rights are severed from surface ownership, it is trespass to use another's surface to assist in mining the minerals beneath that individual's property, but, where an emergency responder accesses

SECTION 50

#1732788073477

3016-411: The right of mere passage, the owner of the soil is still absolute master." British courts have broadened the rights encompassed by public easements in recent years. In DPP v Jones , the court ruled that "the public highway is a public place which the public may enjoy for any reasonable purpose, providing that the activity in question does not amount to a public or private nuisance and does not obstruct

3074-504: The risk. The elements that reinforce the perimeter protection are: In most developed areas the use of fencing is regulated, variously in commercial, residential, and agricultural areas. Height, material, setback , and aesthetic issues are among the considerations subject to regulation. The following types of areas or facilities often are required by law to be fenced in, for safety and security reasons: Servitudes are legal arrangements of land use arising out of private agreements. Under

3132-403: The subsurface following a blowout and fire, no trespass lies. Even the possible subsurface migration of toxic waste stored underground is not trespass, except where the plaintiff can demonstrate that the actions "actually interfere with the [owner's] reasonable and foreseeable use of the subsurface", or, in some jurisdictions, that the subsurface trespasser knows with "substantial certainty" that

3190-553: The surveyed property line as precisely as possible. Today, across the nation, each state is free to develop its own laws regarding fences. In many cases for both rural and urban property owners, the laws were designed to require adjacent landowners to share the responsibility for maintaining a common boundary fenceline. Today, however, only 22 states have retained that provision. Some U.S. states, including Texas , Illinois , Missouri , and North Carolina , have enacted laws establishing that purple paint markings on fences (or trees) are

3248-431: The toxic liquids will migrate to the neighboring land. Domain of landowners over their airspace is limited to the lower atmosphere. In the United States, United States v. Causby (1946) limited landowner domain to the space below 365 feet (111 m), Justice William O. Douglas reasoned that, should it find in the landowners' favor and accept the "ancient doctrine that at common law ownership of land extend[s] to

3306-441: The vast land area involved made extensive fencing impractical until mandated by a growing population and conflicts between landowners. The "open range" tradition of requiring landowners to fence out unwanted livestock was dominant in most of the rural west until very late in the 20th century, and even today, a few isolated regions of the west still have open range statutes on the books. More recently, fences are generally constructed on

3364-516: The violation of airspace took place several hundred meters above the land: "If the Latin maxim were applied literally it would lead to the absurdity of trespass being committed every time a satellite passed over a suburban garden." The main element of the tort is "interference". This must be both direct and physical, with indirect interference instead being covered by negligence or nuisance . "Interference" covers any physical entry to land, as well as

#476523