Trespass to Person and Trespass to Property | Civil Law for Judiciary Exams PDF Download

Introduction

• In contemporary society, individuals seek to safeguard their bodies and property from external interference and malicious intent. Trespass serves as a legal concept aimed at protecting individuals from unauthorized intrusions into their property or body.
• Defined as an intentional wrongful act committed with the aim of causing harm, trespass necessitates that the act be done voluntarily, emphasizing the importance of intention in establishing trespass.

Trespass can be classified into two main categories:

• Trespass to person
• Trespass to property and goods

Trespass to Person

Trespass to a person involves unjustifiable interference, often with malicious intent, with an individual's body, either through physical harm or by inducing fear of force. This category includes assault, battery, and false imprisonment.

Assault

• Assault refers to causing someone to fear harm, leading to mental distress. Physical harm is not a prerequisite for proving assault.
• In the case of R v. S. George, a person brandished a gun, instilling fear in another individual, resulting in shock. The individual was held accountable, regardless of whether the gun was loaded, emphasizing the foreseeability of fear.
• Similarly, in R v. Constanza, the defendant's actions, including sending offensive letters and causing emotional distress, constituted assault, leading to liability.

Battery

• Battery occurs when intentional force causes physical injury to a person without lawful justification. Unintentional or lawful use of force does not qualify as battery.
• In Stanley v. Powell, accidental injury caused by a gunshot did not result in liability for battery as the act was not intentional.
• However, using force against a trespasser is permissible. For example, in Pratap Daji v. B.B. & C.I. Rly., forceful removal of a trespasser from a train carriage was deemed justifiable, as force against trespassers is typically justified.

Mayhem

• Mayhem is a type of tort that results in such severe injuries to an individual that the victim becomes incapable of defending themselves against the perpetrator.
• Examples of mayhem include injuries to body parts like arms, hands, legs, or feet that lead to the disablement of those body parts.
• Mayhem is sometimes referred to as aggravated battery due to the seriousness of the harm caused.
• In the legal case of Fetter v. Beale, the plaintiff was initially compensated for a battery committed by the defendant. Subsequently, a portion of the plaintiff's skull was dislodged due to the battery.
• As a result, the plaintiff sued the defendant for mayhem in addition to the battery, and the defendant was found liable for mayhem as well, being required to compensate the plaintiff for the damages caused.

False Imprisonment

• Definition: False imprisonment occurs when an individual is deliberately restrained from exercising their freedom without lawful justification.
• Key Elements:
  • Cause of Imprisonment: The reason behind the restriction is a crucial factor in determining false imprisonment.
  • Plaintiff's Knowledge: The person being confined must be aware of their confinement for it to constitute false imprisonment.
  • Defendant's Intent: The intention of the person imposing the restriction is also essential in evaluating false imprisonment.
• Case Study: Herring v. Boyle
  • Scenario: A school teacher prevented a student from leaving with his mother until unpaid fees were settled.
  • Ruling: The court found that since the student was unaware of the situation, it did not qualify as false imprisonment.
• Case Study: Meering v. Graham White Aviation
  • Incident: The plaintiff was confined in a room by security guards on suspicion of theft.
  • Ruling: As the plaintiff was unaware of the guards' orders to prevent him from leaving, it constituted false imprisonment.
  • Outcome: The plaintiff was awarded damages due to the wrongful confinement.

Defences to Trespass to Person

• Valid Arrest:
  • Lawful detention is permissible if there is reasonable suspicion of involvement in an offense, not constituting false imprisonment.
  • An arrest without justified cause can lead to lawful detention.
• Consent:
  • If an individual consents willingly to a trespass, it does not amount to unlawful action.
  • For instance, in the case of Robinson v. Balmin New Ferry Company Ltd., the plaintiff agreed to pay a fee to use a turnstile but later refused, leading to his denial of access by the defendants.
• Probable Cause:
  • Imprisonment based on the suspicion of involvement in a crime is not deemed false imprisonment.
• Self Defence:
  • Individuals have the right to use reasonable force to protect themselves, others, or property against unlawful force.
  • For example, in Cresswell v. Sirl, a defendant was not held liable for shooting a dog that threatened his livestock as it was seen as a necessary act to protect the animals.

Remedies to Trespass to Person

• Action for Damages:
  • A person can seek financial compensation when their body is unlawfully violated. This compensation not only covers physical harm but also any infringement on their freedom.
• Self Help:
  • Self-help is a remedy for individuals who have been wrongfully confined. It allows the person to free themselves instead of waiting for legal intervention.
• Writ of Habeas Corpus:
  • The Supreme Court and High Court in India have the authority to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus under Article 32 and Article 226 of the Indian Constitution, respectively. This writ is used to secure the release of a person who is unlawfully detained. The detainer must present the detained individual before the court and justify the detention. If the court deems the detention unjustified, the person must be released immediately.
  • In significant cases like Rudal Shah v. State of Bihar and Bhim Singh v. State of Jammu and Kashmir, the Supreme Court has awarded compensation in Habeas Corpus writs.

Trespass to Property or Goods

• Definition: Trespass to property or goods occurs when someone wrongfully interferes with another person's belongings without lawful justification. This interference must be direct and physical in nature.
• Focus on Possession: Trespass to property emphasizes possession rather than ownership. This means that a person in possession of goods or property can take legal action against the lawful owner if they cannot provide a valid reason for the interference.

Examples:

• Madhav Vithal Kudwa v. Madhavdas Vallabhdas Case: In this case, a tenant living in a multi-storey building was accused of trespass for parking his car in the landlord's compound. The court ruled that parking in a multi-storey building did not constitute trespass.
• Basely v. Clarkson Case: The defendant unintentionally cut grass beyond his property boundary onto his neighbor's land. Despite claiming mistake, the court rejected the plea as the act was not truly unintentional. However, involuntary entry would not constitute trespass.
• Smith v. Stone Case: An individual was thrown onto someone's land, but since the entry was unintentional, it was not considered trespass.

Key Points:

• Presumed Possession: Possession of land includes the ground below and the airspace above. Any entry below the surface is considered trespass.
• Types of Trespass: Trespass can occur through air, land, animals, etc.

Aerial Trespass:

• Rights to Airspace: Land possessors have rights to airspace above their land. However, they only have rights to airspace necessary for normal land use and enjoyment.
• Bernstein v. Skyviews Case: A case where taking pictures from a significant height was not considered aerial trespass as the landowner had no justified use for the airspace at that height.

Trespass by Animals:

• Responsibility: Livestock owners are liable for damages caused by their animals on others' land, even if the animals trespass on their own. The Cattle Trespass Act, 1871 addresses this in India.

Trespass ab initio:

• Definition: Trespass ab initio occurs when a person legally enters premises but commits trespass after their right to enter ends. This makes their original entry wrongful, and they are liable for all subsequent acts.
• Minister of Health Case: It established that a licensee who refuses to vacate premises after expiration of the license can be prosecuted for trespass.

Remedies to Trespass against Property

The individual whose land possession rights are violated has the right to file a lawsuit against the wrongdoer for trespass. They can also use a reasonable amount of force to protect their possession from trespassers.

• Damages: Financial Compensation: If significant losses occur due to the trespass, the plaintiff can claim financial damages from the defendant. In cases where no injury is sustained, a nominal compensation may be awarded.
• Injunction: Sometimes, instead of seeking compensation, the plaintiff may request an injunction from the court to stop ongoing or potential future trespass. For instance, the court may order the removal of a tree owned by the defendant.

Defences against Trespass to Property

• Consent: Trespass to property can be defended if the possessor of the property consents to the intervention voluntarily. However, if consent is obtained through fraud, intoxication, or by an incompetent person, it will not be considered valid. For example, if someone enters your garden with your permission but then starts damaging your plants without your knowledge, their actions would not be covered by consent.
• Public Necessity: This defense applies when a person enters someone else's property to prevent immediate and essential harm to the community. For instance, in the case of Esso Petroleum Co v Southport Corporation, the captain of a ship allowed oil to flood a shoreline to protect his ship and crew members. This defense is valid only when there are no alternative options available to prevent the harm.
• Justification by Law: This defense is applicable when a person is legally permitted to enter someone's premises under specific statutes or laws. Examples include police officers or income tax officers who have the legal authority to enter private properties for official purposes.