In simple terms
Land is more than the surface. It takes in what is fixed to it, mines and minerals, and some of the air above. It does not, in the modern cases, reach to the heavens.
The old maxim is : who owns the soil owns up to the heavens and down to the depths. Bowen LJ in Pountney v Clayton gives the cautious version. , the owner has everything under the sky down to the centre of the earth.
The courts have cut the maxim down. Griffiths J in Bernstein v Skyviews called it a colourful phrase. In United States v Causby the United States Supreme Court said it had no place in the modern world. The Privy Council said the same in Commissioner for Railways v Valuer-General. The useful right is to the airspace the owner needs for the ordinary use of the land, not to an infinite column.
Section 205 of the Law of Property Act 1925, which does not itself apply in Sierra Leone, defines land widely: land of any tenure, mines and minerals, , and easements, rights and privileges over land. Section 4 of the Interpretation Act 1971 is to the same effect. In Sierra Leone, land includes land covered by water, any house, building or structure, and any estate, interest or right in or over land or water.
What the may do with that land is another question. , and the stop a use that injures a neighbour. Gold and silver were the Crown's at common law. In Sierra Leone minerals are dealt with by statute. The statutes are the Minerals Act and The Mines and Minerals Act, 2009. Other statutes take slices of the owner's freedom: forestry, the Guma Valley, civil aviation, defence, The Public Lands Ordinance, 1898, town planning, and public health.
Wild animals are no one's until they are killed or taken. In Sutton v Moody an animal killed by a belonged to the landowner. In a non-tidal river the owner of the bed has the fishing. In a tidal river the public may fish, and the bed is the State's. A riparian owner may take water for ordinary purposes. Embrey v Owen and Rugby Joint Water Board v Walters are the authorities for reasonable use, without a substantial change in quality or volume.
Things found on the land are not automatically the finder's. Parker v British Airways Board and City of London Corporation v Appleyard sort out the occupier's rights and the finder's.
Words and Latin in this note
- Rule in Rylands v Fletcher
- Strict liability of a landowner who brings onto his land something likely to do harm if it escapes, and it does escape and cause damage. Open the note.
- Cuius est solum
- 'Who owns the soil owns up to the heavens and down to the depths.' A colourful phrase. It does not give the owner a claim for every overflight. The right stops at the airspace needed for ordinary use of the land.
- Hereditament
- A right that can be inherited. A corporeal hereditament is the physical land. An incorporeal one is a right over land you cannot pick up, such as an easement. Open the note.
- Prima facie
- At first sight: evidence strong enough to prove a point unless it is answered or contradicted. Open the note.
- Fee simple
- The fullest form of land ownership: the owner holds the land for ever and can sell, give away or leave it by will. Open the note.
- Nuisance
- Unreasonable interference with a person's use or enjoyment of land (private nuisance) or with the rights of the public (public nuisance). Open the note.
- Fixture
- A chattel that has become part of the land, because of how firmly it is fixed and why. It passes with the land unless the contract says otherwise. Open the note.
Memory map
What counts as land
Key points
- The owner has the surface, the fixtures
- In Sierra Leone the Interpretation Act 1971…
- Statute, nuisance and the mineral regime cut…
Cases
- Bernstein v Skyviews & General Ltd
- United States v Causby
- Commissioner for Railways v…
- Rylands v Fletcher
Key terms
- Prima facie
- Fee simple
- Cuius est solum
- Hereditament
Take-home points
- The owner has the surface, the , and the airspace needed for ordinary use. Not the heavens.
- In Sierra Leone the Interpretation Act 1971 folds buildings, water and rights over land into the word 'land'.
- Statute, nuisance and the mineral regime cut down what a fee simple owner may do.
Cases in this topic
- Bernstein v Skyviews & General Ltd
- United States v Causby
- Commissioner for Railways v Valuer-General
- Rylands v Fletcher
- Parker v British Airways Board
- City of London Corporation v Appleyard
- Embrey v Owen
- Sutton v Moody
See also
- The Mines and Minerals Act, 2009 · 2009
- The Public Lands Ordinance, 1898 · 1898
- United States v Causby · Lanbuk on the Law of Land · 328 US 256
- Commissioner for Railways v Valuer-General · Lanbuk on the Law of Land · AC 328
- Sutton v Moody · Lanbuk on the Law of Land · 1 Ld Raym 250
- Embrey v Owen · Lanbuk on the Law of Land · 6 Ex 353
- Parker v British Airways Board · Lanbuk on the Law of Torts · [1982] QB 1004
- City of London Corporation v Appleyard · Lanbuk on the Law of Land · 1 WLR 982
Lecture notes on this subject
Other law notes by subject
Arbitration
Business and human rights
Civil procedure
- The Slip Rule and Judicial Finality: Correcting Errors in Court Orders in the UK and Sierra Leone
- Sierra Leone's Court System and Starting Civil Proceedings in the High Court
- Who Addresses the Court First in Closing Speeches, and Why
- Disposal of Cases on Points of Law under Order 17
- Garnishee Proceedings under Order 50
- Interlocutory and Final Judgments
Constitutional and administrative law
Contract law
Criminal procedure
- No Case Submission: Interpreting 'Otherwise Deals in or With' under the National Drugs Control Act 2008
- Legal Authorities for a No Case Submission on Drug Importation Charges
- No Case to Answer: Analysis of a Drug Importation Prosecution
- Criminal Procedure: Law School Notes
- Submission of No Case to Answer: Dealing in Prohibited Drugs
Environmental and climate law
Equity and trusts
Exam preparation
Family law
Human rights
International law
Radiation and nuclear safety law