Fallen leaves and fruit

Post Reply
Morgan Sweet
Posts: 286
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2015 7:47 pm

Re: Fallen leaves and fruit

Post by Morgan Sweet » Wed Nov 07, 2018 8:34 pm

TO wrote:
Wed Nov 07, 2018 6:36 pm
thin and crispy wrote:
Wed Nov 07, 2018 12:58 am
As you've read it TO, what does it say specifically about the cases when:
a) The tree is not in a hedge (i.e. not as in the 17th C judgement)
b) The fruit owner deliberately or negligently deposits his fruit on the neighbour's land?

Useful to know that you think Mynors is reasonably priced.
In answer to a) Mynors doesn't list any other cases. He only states, on the basis of the referenced case, that the tree/fruit owner can collect their fruit. He does go on to explain why the tree/fruit owner can get their fruit; because to deny them would constitute theft which is a criminal offence, or possibly, depending on what you do with the fruit, conversion, a civil offence. He doesn't suggest the theft of the fruit is qualified on the basis of where it is growing. Although you clearly disagree, considering the theft of the fruit to occur only when the tree is in a hedge.

In answer to b)The title of the book gives a clue to its contents. It is not a book on neighbour disputes. If you have a problem with your neighbour there is legislation to deal with that, and the Courts have the power to grant injunctions.
thin and crispy wrote:
Wed Nov 07, 2018 3:33 pm
I've decided to add is Prick Strips on the fence; the other is best not mentioned here.
That would have been better off not mentioned here. You cannot avoid your duty of care just because your neighbour is eccentric.

I consider Mynors book reasonably priced because there is no other similar authoritative tome.
I think that Charles infers that he also thought that the book was a little pricey!

viewtopic.php?t=10630#p85681

ukmicky
Posts: 5114
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 10:13 pm
Number of Posts per Page: 20
Number of topics per page: 20
Location: London

Re: Fallen leaves and fruit

Post by ukmicky » Thu Nov 08, 2018 12:27 am

Forget about Charles Mynor ,for a start his book is old and its also an opinion of someone trying to sell a book and has not been peer reviewed to the standard required for it to be deemed an authority on common law .


The actual leading authority on torts (common law) which has been peer reviewed to the required standards and is used by the Judges ,lawyers and universities for students studying common law is Clerk & Lindsell on Torts.

It says
A person may justify entry onto the claimant’s land for the purpose of recaption of his goods if the goods were taken and put there by the wrongful act of the claimant himself. But beyond this proposition the law is regrettably unclear.


In Anthony v Haney, Tindal CJ was of the opinion obiter that entry was permissible on the land of an innocent person where (a) the goods came there by accident, (b) a thief took them to such land, or (c) the occupier refused to redeliver them. With regard to accidental presence, this would seem a reasonable allowance of law, but the justification would not extend to an owner of goods by whose wrong (for example, trespass) the goods came there.

On the contrary, the occupier might detain pending compensation for any damage done. With regard to refusal to redeliver the Chief Justice thought that a positive refusal might be considered a conversion “or at any rate the owner might in such case enter and take his property subject to the payment of any damage he might commit”. It is suggested that such a right can be asserted at least where the owner of goods is blameless with regard to their presence on the land and where he gives reasonable notice and an explanation of the facts relating to the goods before entering for reception. Merely to enter without giving an opportunity for voluntary redelivery would be unjustifiable and therefore a trespass.
Unfortunately there is very little case law on the subject and there is nothing from any court of high enough standing that has created any precedent that must be followed which is why they say on the first line ''But beyond this proposition the law is regrettably unclear''


From the above Thin and crispy ,you should now know as much as the legal profession know and where you stand in relation to your neighbours access to your property.
Last edited by ukmicky on Thu Nov 08, 2018 1:10 am, edited 4 times in total.
Any information provided is not legal advice and you are advised to gain a professional opinion

ukmicky
Posts: 5114
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 10:13 pm
Number of Posts per Page: 20
Number of topics per page: 20
Location: London

Re: Fallen leaves and fruit

Post by ukmicky » Thu Nov 08, 2018 12:54 am

Just in case someone questions the information in Clerk & Lindsell on Torts vs that in Charles mynor :The Law of Trees, Forests and Hedges,

Sweet and Maxwell the leading publishers of legal publication in the UK say

Clerk & Lindsell on Torts, part of our Common Law Library series, is one of our flagship titles. It is the definitive work and market leader in this area of law; it offers the most comprehensive coverage of the subject, providing the end user with indispensable access to current, frequent and unrivalled authoritative information on all aspects of tort law. An essential reference tool, Clerk & Lindsell is widely referred to by practitioners and cited by the judiciary.
Any information provided is not legal advice and you are advised to gain a professional opinion

despair
Posts: 16483
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2005 7:07 am

Re: Fallen leaves and fruit

Post by despair » Thu Nov 08, 2018 1:07 am

Apples will stick to prick strips sadly ...much better to use the wavy hair type of plastic additions to fences

User avatar
thin and crispy
Posts: 895
Joined: Tue May 08, 2007 8:57 pm

Re: Fallen leaves and fruit

Post by thin and crispy » Thu Nov 08, 2018 1:12 am

Thank you ukmicky and TO for addressing my specific legal questions.
Anthracite wrote:
Wed Nov 07, 2018 7:49 pm
Surely the intention of the prick strips are to prevent the placement of apples on the fence rather than to cause injury to anyone. I presume that the neighbour would not want to place his mega-organic apples on man made plastic spikes.
That is exactly so Anthracite.

If I had intended to lay a trap to injure my neighbour, I would hardly be stupid enough to mention it on an open forum. I am surprised that several forum members would jump to such a conclusion. To be honest, it's rather insulting.

In any case, as I said before (on page 3 of this thread), there is trellis on top of the fence panels. That would not hold his weight should he try to climb over, and he would undoubtedly damage it and probably fall. The trellis is not there as a trap either (I installed it for aesthetic reasons and for privacy) so if he tries to climb over and injures himself he would only have himself to blame. I seriously doubt that his judgement over such matters is impaired, but even if it is, I cannot be obliged to act as his carer. Would anyone advocate that I remove the trellis so he has a safer route by which to gain access to my garden?
Last edited by thin and crispy on Thu Nov 08, 2018 1:32 am, edited 2 times in total.
Prejudice, not being founded on reason, cannot be removed by argument. Samuel Johnson.

User avatar
thin and crispy
Posts: 895
Joined: Tue May 08, 2007 8:57 pm

Re: Fallen leaves and fruit

Post by thin and crispy » Thu Nov 08, 2018 1:30 am

ukmicky wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 12:27 am
From the above Thin and crispy ,you should now know as much as the legal profession know and where you stand in relation to your neighbours access to your property.
Yes, this thread's been very informative. Thanks ukmicky. I appreciate your time, and indeed that of everyone who has contributed.
Prejudice, not being founded on reason, cannot be removed by argument. Samuel Johnson.

ukmicky
Posts: 5114
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 10:13 pm
Number of Posts per Page: 20
Number of topics per page: 20
Location: London

Re: Fallen leaves and fruit

Post by ukmicky » Thu Nov 08, 2018 1:37 am

thin and crispy wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 1:12 am
Thank you ukmicky and TO for addressing my specific legal questions.
Anthracite wrote:
Wed Nov 07, 2018 7:49 pm
Surely the intention of the prick strips are to prevent the placement of apples on the fence rather than to cause injury to anyone. I presume that the neighbour would not want to place his mega-organic apples on man made plastic spikes.
That is exactly so. If I had intended to lay a trap to injure my neighbour, I would hardly have mentioned it on an open forum. I am surprised that several forum members would jump to such a conclusion. To be honest, it's rather insulting.

In any case, as I said before, there is trellis on top of the fence panels. That would not hold his weight should he try to climb over, and he would undoubtedly damage it and probably fall. The trellis is there for aesthetic reasons and for privacy. It is not there as a trap either, so if he tries to climb over and injures himself he only has himself to blame. I seriously doubt that his judgement over such matters is impaired, but even if it is, I cannot be obliged to act as his carer. Would anyone advocate that I remove the trellis so he has a safer route by which to gain access to my garden?
You would not be in anyway way legally responsible for any harm that came to him if he hurt himself climbing over your fence . If its was me and I considered it likely that he would climb over my fence and it didn't destroy the look of my trellis I would consider placing anti climb paint on some of the trellis and if I did I would inform him in writing that the paint was on the fence and what would happen if attempted to climb over it..
Any information provided is not legal advice and you are advised to gain a professional opinion

IdefixUK
Posts: 708
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 12:07 pm
Number of topics per page: 25

Re: Fallen leaves and fruit

Post by IdefixUK » Thu Nov 08, 2018 6:38 am

Occupiers' Liability Act 1984.

TO
Posts: 709
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 1:05 pm

Re: Fallen leaves and fruit

Post by TO » Thu Nov 08, 2018 7:43 am

ukmicky wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 1:37 am
You would not be in anyway way legally responsible for any harm that came to him if he hurt himself climbing over your fence .
ukmicky wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 1:37 am
Advice given is not legally qualified and you are advised to gain a professional opinion
IdefixUK wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 6:38 am
Occupiers' Liability Act 1984.
And the 1957 Act

mr sheen
Posts: 2622
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 2:33 pm

Re: Fallen leaves and fruit

Post by mr sheen » Thu Nov 08, 2018 10:18 am

A neighbour obsessively collects his apples......his neighbour obsessively seeks ways to hinder and stop him. A dispute between neighbours exists with both behaving or seeking to behave...badly. This matter can only escalate unless one side puts apples and leaves into perspective in relation to the real issues that most people face in life.

The options are still....ignore him and live with it; seek an injunction to stop him; or move.

As for the assurance that "you would not be in any way legally responsible for any harm..." this would require an assessment of specific circumstances and no-one here has all the information that could give you that assurance.

arborlad
Posts: 8633
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 6:30 pm
Location: Hertfordshire

Re: Fallen leaves and fruit

Post by arborlad » Thu Nov 08, 2018 11:21 am

Once threads descend into moving house and injunctions I think they've gone way off track, if this had been about two adjoining commercial orchards then I would expect 'Mynors' or a 15th Century precedent to be the relative law on the matter - but it's not, it's about two residential gardens where I would expect the man on the Clapham Omnibus to have more relevance.

If you wish to cultivate something that you place a high (fiscal?) value on, it would make sense if it were grown where only the owner could reach it and any fruit that falls is onto land that he owns.
arborlad

smile...it confuses people

TO
Posts: 709
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 1:05 pm

Re: Fallen leaves and fruit

Post by TO » Thu Nov 08, 2018 2:29 pm

ukmicky wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 12:27 am
Forget about Charles Mynor ,for a start his book is old and its also an opinion of someone trying to sell a book and has not been peer reviewed to the standard required for it to be deemed an authority on common law .


The actual leading authority on torts (common law) which has been peer reviewed to the required standards and is used by the Judges ,lawyers and universities for students studying common law is Clerk & Lindsell on Torts.

It says
A person may justify entry onto the claimant’s land for the purpose of recaption of his goods if the goods were taken and put there by the wrongful act of the claimant himself. But beyond this proposition the law is regrettably unclear.


In Anthony v Haney, Tindal CJ was of the opinion obiter that entry was permissible on the land of an innocent person where (a) the goods came there by accident, (b) a thief took them to such land, or (c) the occupier refused to redeliver them. With regard to accidental presence, this would seem a reasonable allowance of law, but the justification would not extend to an owner of goods by whose wrong (for example, trespass) the goods came there.

On the contrary, the occupier might detain pending compensation for any damage done. With regard to refusal to redeliver the Chief Justice thought that a positive refusal might be considered a conversion “or at any rate the owner might in such case enter and take his property subject to the payment of any damage he might commit”. It is suggested that such a right can be asserted at least where the owner of goods is blameless with regard to their presence on the land and where he gives reasonable notice and an explanation of the facts relating to the goods before entering for reception. Merely to enter without giving an opportunity for voluntary redelivery would be unjustifiable and therefore a trespass.
Unfortunately there is very little case law on the subject and there is nothing from any court of high enough standing that has created any precedent that must be followed which is why they say on the first line ''But beyond this proposition the law is regrettably unclear''


From the above Thin and crispy ,you should now know as much as the legal profession know and where you stand in relation to your neighbours access to your property.
What point years at university getting a law degree, and experience in work, when you can be better educated on this website in minutes by reading posts which are factually incorrect, misleading, contradictory, and demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of the issues.

Collaborate
Posts: 2039
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2015 9:17 am
Number of Posts per Page: 20
Number of topics per page: 20

Re: Fallen leaves and fruit

Post by Collaborate » Thu Nov 08, 2018 2:44 pm

TO wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 2:29 pm

What point years at university getting a law degree, and experience in work, when you can be better educated on this website in minutes by reading posts which are factually incorrect, misleading, contradictory, and demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of the issues.
This proper made my day. :D

IdefixUK
Posts: 708
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 12:07 pm
Number of topics per page: 25

Re: Fallen leaves and fruit

Post by IdefixUK » Thu Nov 08, 2018 3:02 pm

[/quote]What point years at university getting a law degree, and experience in work, when you can be better educated on this website in minutes by reading posts which are factually incorrect, misleading, contradictory, and demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of the issues.
[/quote]

So , in general terms, using Gardenlaw is exactly like the advice available from many a High Street solicitor, me thinks, only much much cheaper.... :D

Collaborate
Posts: 2039
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2015 9:17 am
Number of Posts per Page: 20
Number of topics per page: 20

Re: Fallen leaves and fruit

Post by Collaborate » Thu Nov 08, 2018 4:11 pm

IdefixUK wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 3:02 pm

So , in general terms, using Gardenlaw is exactly like the advice available from many a High Street solicitor, me thinks, only much much cheaper.... :D
So if you give crap advice there is a regulator and an ombudsman to whom someone can complain? And you have indemnity insurance for any compensation you're liable to pay?

I'd love to know where you go for medical treatment. I presume you steer well clear of those "elite" doctor types.

Post Reply