Yew Huoi, How & Associates | Leading Malaysia Law Firm

TORT — TRESPASS — TRESPASS TO LAND

In brief

  •  The owner of property has the legal right to use it in whatever legal way they see fit, including restricting other people from entering it. Trespassing, often known as trespass to land, happens when someone enters another person’s property without their permission or a legal right to be there. Trespassing can be a criminal, a civil tort, or both, depending on the location of the trespass and the state’s laws. Trespassing can also occur when someone enters another person’s property without permission and refuses to leave after being asked.

Examples: Criminal trespass can be charged against someone who trespasses onto another person’s property and steals their personal belongings. However, if a trespasser damages the homeowner’s property, the homeowner can claim under civil tort law.

What are the elements to trespass onto land? 

  •  Trespass to land is a common law tort that arises when an individual or the item they control enters another’s property without having the legal right or authorization to do so. The tort of trespass to land has two elements: an actual interference with the right of exclusive possession, known as the entry element, and an intent or negligence in entering the land of another.
  •  The definition of criminal trespass varies from state to state. However, the general elements of criminal trespassing typically include intentionally entering or remaining on another person’s or property without authorization or consent, and entering or remaining on another person’s or property without authorization or consent.

How does one establish trespass to land?

  •  In general, the plaintiff must show whether the defendant entered onto the land or whether the land belonged to another individual in order to show that the defendant is liable for trespass to the land. Furthermore, the defendant must not have had consent to enter and the trespasser must have caused damages.

Examples: Trespass to land examples include a person remaining in a cinema after the film has ended, a person remaining in another person’s home after being asked to leave, hunting on property where the individual is not authorized, and many more.

Recent Post

JURISDICTION – CHOOSING THE RIGHT COURT: THE SEA JUSTICE CASE HIGHLIGHTS WHERE MARITIME DISPUTES SHOULD BE HEARD

In The Sea Justice cases [2024] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 383 and [2024] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 429, the Singapore courts tackled a key question: which country should handle a maritime dispute when incidents span international waters? After examining the location of the collision, existing limitation funds in China, and witness availability, the courts concluded that China was the more appropriate forum. This ruling highlights that courts will often defer to the jurisdiction with the closest ties to the incident, ensuring efficient and fair handling of cross-border maritime disputes. This approach is also relevant in Malaysia, where similar principles apply.

Read More »

BREACH OF CONTRACT – FORCE MAJEURE – FORCE MAJEURE UNPACKED: WHEN ‘REASONABLE ENDEAVOURS’ DON’T BEND CONTRACT TERMS

The UK Supreme Court clarified the limits of force majeure clauses, ruling that “reasonable endeavours” do not require a party to accept alternative performance outside the agreed contract terms. This decision emphasizes that force majeure clauses are meant to uphold, not alter, original obligations – even in unexpected circumstances. The case serves as a reminder for businesses to define alternative options explicitly within their contracts if flexibility is desired.

Read More »

NEGLIGENCE – MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE – HOSPITAL ACCOUNTABILITY REINFORCED: COURT UPHOLDS NON-DELEGABLE DUTY IN MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE

In a landmark ruling, the court reinforced the hospital’s non-delegable duty of care, holding that even when services are outsourced to independent contractors, the hospital remains accountable for patient welfare. This decision emphasizes that vulnerable patients, reliant on medical institutions, must be safeguarded against harm caused by third-party providers. The ruling ultimately rejected the hospital’s defense of independence for contracted consultants, underscoring a high standard of duty owed to patients.

Read More »

CONTRACTS – CONTRACT FOR THE SALE OF GOODS FOB – REMOTENESS OF DAMAGES IN BACK-TO-BACK CONTRACTS – COURT DEFINES LIMITS ON LIABILITY

In a complex dispute involving back-to-back contracts, the court clarified the boundaries for assessing damages, emphasizing that a chain of contracts does not automatically ensure liability passes through. Although substantial losses resulted from delays and disruption, the court highlighted the importance of the remoteness of damages, noting that each contract’s unique terms ultimately limited liability. This decision emphasise the need for parties in chain contracts to carefully define indemnity and liability provisions, as damages are assessed based on foreseeability rather than simply the structure of linked agreements.

Read More »

TORT – BREAKING CONFIDENTIALITY – COURT CRACKS DOWN ON INSIDER LEAKS AND CORPORATE CONSPIRACY

In a recent ruling on corporate confidentiality, the court held two former employees liable for disclosing sensitive business information to a competitor, deeming it a breach of both employment contracts and fiduciary duties. This case highlights the serious consequences of unauthorized sharing of proprietary data and reinforces that such disclosures can lead to substantial legal and financial repercussions, even for the receiving parties if they knowingly benefit from confidential information.

Read More »
en_USEN
× Contact Us