Ownership of Land - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 6 Words: 1704 Downloads: 10 Date added: 2017/06/26 Category Law Essay Type Analytical essay Did you like this example? This question requires detailed analysis on laws relating to ownership of the land and title to items found in or on the surface of the land. As the principle of law states ‘whoever owns the soil owns everything up to the heavens and down to the depth of the earth’. A person having proprietary rights in the land also has the control of it above and below the surface of the ground, anything that is part of the land, and anything that is sufficiently attached to the land. However this does not mean that a person having control of the land has the right to anything that may be in or on his land. A clear distinction has been drawn between situations where objects are found in the land or on the surface of the land. If an object is found in or attached to the land, the owner of the land has the best claim to it providing that the true owner was not found. Where the object is resting on the ground the position will be different, because the finder of the ob ject then has a better claim to the object. This issue has troubled lawyers long as to who is the lawful owner of items found in or on the land; I shall be discussing the principles of law in question with reference to case law and relevant Statutory Acts Possible claimants who may be entitled to claim the pottery vase found are the Crown, under the Treasure Act 1996; Bryn, as the finder of the object; Carrie as his employer or as a person in occupation of the land; and Zac as the owner of the land. The pottery vase discovered by Bryn may belong to the Crown as treasure under the Treasure Act 1996. An item that falls within the statutory definition of ‘treasure’ is the property of the Crown. According to s.1 of the Treasure Act 1996 ‘treasure’ is defined as an object which is not a coin and is at least 300 years old either gold or silver with 10% of precious metallic content. Under para (a) of s.1 (1) coins can also qualify as a treasure where two or more coins from the same find are found and they are at least 300 years old containing at least 10% of precious metal. We do not have sufficient information to suggest whether the coins found would be ranked as a treasure or not, however if it was a treasure the pottery vase would also be likely to be ranked as a treasure. Assuming that the object found is not a treasure. The next issue is to identify who has the best title to it. The claim to ownership depends on where the object was found. Due to insufficient information it may be assumed that the object was found on the surface of the ground. Bryn as the finder of the object may have a good claim for it. The case of Armory v Delamirie suggests that the finder does not obtain an absolute right to the finding but he can keep it providing that the true owner is not found. In English law the person who can establish a prior possession to an object has a better claim than the person who acquires the possession later] Costello v Der byshire Chief Constable. In this situation the issue is whether Carrie, the owner of the land on which the object was found can be considered to have possession of it before it was found. It is possible for Carrie to have possession of the object which is lying around her land even though she doesn’t know about it, but only if she has manifested an intention to exercise control over the land and things upon it i.e animus possidendi. This depends on whether the land where the object is found was open to public or not, thus in the case of Brides v Hawkesworth the courts held that a traveller who found a bag of money in a shop has a better title to it than the owner of the shop because the shop was open to public at the time he found the object. In parker v British Airways Board, British airways exercised partial control of airport lounge by checking tickets and allowing specific passengers to enter the lounge was held to be insufficient to allow it that it had superior rights t o any objects found in the lounge. The item was found in Carrie’s garden which is a private property and Bryn was there only for gardening purposes, the requisite intention to manifest control will be inferred readily (). Carrie may have a better claim than Bryn on the grounds that Bryn was employed by Carrie and as an employer she had a clear right to direct how anything in the garden should be dealt with. Where in the course of employment an item is found by an employee, his employer has a better right to it than the employee; this was the decision in South Staffordshire Water Co v Sharman. This principle also includes independent Contractors City of London Corporation v Appleyard. As Bryn was employed by Carrie and anything that he finds on the land during the course of his employment, he finds on Carrie’s behalf. Bryn would therefore have mere custody of the item and Carrie would have the legal possession of the item, Carrie is likely to have a better claim than Bryn. Against this there is a strong counter-argument that the pottery vase was found buried in the ground by Bryn whilst gardening. In English law where an item is found in the ground the landowner (Zac) is entitled to it, providing that the true owner cannot be found. Animus possidendi of the free hold owner of the land is presumed where chattels are attached or buried in the land, so he will have superior rights than the finder of the object parker v British Airways Board. In the case of Elwes v Brigg Gas Company the lease holder could not claim a better title to a pre-historic boat found buried in the soil. It was held to belong to the freehold owner of the land. In the given scenario if the pottery vase was found buried in the ground then Zac being the freehold owner of the land would have a better title. Alternatively if Carrie could prove that the item had come on to the land during her tenancy, she may claim a better title than Zac. The next issue is to identify who h as a better title to the diamond brooch, which Carrie found whilst walking on the land which was owned by Mr Cartwright. Again due to insufficient information it cannot be suggested whether the item found falls under the definition of ‘treasure’ or not so ownership would not vest in the Crown. Possible claimants who may be entitle to claim the brooch might therefore include Mr Cartwright, as the true owner of the land; and Carrie by virtue of ‘finders keepers’ principle. Assuming that the object found does not qualify as a treasure, we then have to find out who could claim a better title to the brooch. In the given situation the brooch was found sticking out from grass, which might have come up to the surface due to the rain. Where a chattel is attached to the land or buried under the land the freehold owner of the land can generally establish a possession to it prior to that of the finder. The freehold owner of the land in this situation is Mr Cartwrigh t. To acquire property rights in the item Mr Cartwright has to show that he had manifested intention to exercise control over the land. Where the chattel is affixed to or buried in the land, the freehold owner’s intention is presumed, so Mr Cartwright will have right to the item superior to those of the finder parker v British airways, if the was found in the ground. The next issue is to identify who has a better title if the item was found on the ground and it was never buried under the ground. The party who lost the brooch originally has an earlier property right in the brooch, and if the party came forward it would be able to claim the title to the brooch. We do not have sufficient information available to conclude whether the true owner of the brooch will be able to claim it or not. The next party which may have a superior claim to assert the title is Carrie. This scenario can be related to the case of Hannah v peel, where the claimant found a brooch in defendantâ⠂¬â„¢s house which was not attached to the ground nor buried under. She gave it to the police who then gave it back to the defendant who sold it. The claimant sought to claim back the possession of the brooch. It was held that the landowner was not aware of the existence of the brooch until it was brought to his attention by the police; therefore he cannot claim any title over the item found. On the one hand, the result in parker v British Airways Board is consistent with the position in Hannad v peel. British airways did not acquire a property right in the bracelet simply because it was lost and found on its land The court considered the decision in Bridges v Hawkesworth and decided that The point to discuss here is the important general principle that if a party takes physical control of an object, that party acquires a property right in that. This is a fundamental principle of law, so even a thief can rely on it even though he has dishonestly taken control of an object he stil l acquires a property right in it Costello v Chief Constable of Derbyshire. So in the given situation Carrie clearly has a property right in the brooch, she acquired the right simply by taking control of the item. Just as the chimney sweep’s boy in Armory v Delamrie acquired a property right by taking physical control of the jewel Carrie has acquired the right to the brooch. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Ownership of Land" essay for you Create order

Analytical Essay on Wilfred Owens War Poetry- Dulce Et...

Analytical Essay on â€Å"Dulce et Decorum Est† By ZA 2010 and 15 years of Age British war poet, Wilfred Owen, incorporates many techniques of poetry writing in his works. As a soldier, Owen often wrote poems which described the misery and hardships on the fronts of World War One. To illustrate the image and scenes of the conflict, Owen uses an array of techniques which can be noticed in his poem â€Å"Dulce et Decorum Est† In the poem, â€Å"Dulce et Decorum Est†, Owen recollects the event of a gas attack on returning soldiers. Owen writes the poem in his own voice and from his own experiences of war. He addresses the misery, plight and hardships of war to his primary audiences in Britain. Owens main objective of writing â€Å"Dulce et Decorum Est† was to†¦show more content†¦The slow rhythm relates with the slow and tired group of retreating soldiers. Words such as â€Å"haunting flares† and â€Å"trudge†/ â€Å"sludge† slow the poem and add heaviness. Rhythm increases at the beginning of the gas attack (second stanza), as the soldiers scatter into panic. The tone then slows again as Owen depicts the death of the soldier and delves into a reflective mood, as the wagon slowly departs with the dead soldier. Owens uses words ending in â€Å"ing† to create a sense of heaviness and slowness in the pace of the poem. To illustrate the scene of the gas attack, Owen uses many poetic techniques. Owen uses horrid and unpleasant forms of imagery to make the reader realise the reality of war. Instantly from the opening lines, Owen makes an impact on the reader’s impressions about war. â€Å"Bent double, like old beggars under sacks, Knock Kneed, coughing like hags, we cursed through sludge†. Such phrases convey hardship, pitiful conditions and anguish of war. They are supported by detailed visual descriptions such as, â€Å"limped on, blood shod†, â€Å"floundering like a man on fire or lime†, â€Å"guttering, choking, drowning†, â€Å"white yes writhing† and â€Å"come gargling from the froth corrupted lungs†. These images are striking and appealing to the reader. They illustrate an intolerable and unpleasant scene, additionally exposing the lies of propaganda poster images. Techniques such as similes also add to develop an ugly image. Such as, â€Å"Bent double like old beggars† â€Å"coughing like

Stranded Free Essays

It has been three months on this island and no sign of human kind other than my sister and L every day is a challenge between shelter and food Saftey isn’t even a factor in this situation it really is a great challenge. We are currently located at a abandoned ship beeched near some rocks. There were a couple of supplies we gathered along the was such as bottles, containers, planks and more. We will write a custom essay sample on Stranded or any similar topic only for you Order Now Saphlre my sister gashed her leg while searching for fich on a sea shell It has begun toget Infected, we are hoping to find some medical supplies on the ship. so have begun doing everything around here. The food situation Is not well. Its beginning to get chilly Inwlch the flsh are not near shore and the frlut is gone. we have nothing but small creatures to catch and eat. I have been hunting often attempting to find something larger but not succeeding. I don’t know how long we can live In this type of situation. The weather patterns are so different since the war the Island should not be getting cold. The seasons are rapidly changing and It Is maklng things harder and us weaker. It has been a week since her leg Injury and 1m beginning to worry. I can see the pain in her eyes. It is a struggle tor her to even speak im hoping she will survive. Hope is all that is left. have made the decision it we dont tind a new shelter we have no chance. have been working on a ratt and have gathered enough tood. We will be leaving tor sea in the early morning. My sister needs help. I have been placing maggots on her open wound and attempting to keep it clean that’s all I can offer. Were on our way! just got us going, Hoping we will find land soon. packed enough food for two weeks, and enough water for three. Im hoping we find land before we run out. How to cite Stranded, Papers