Property - Hannah v. Peel.docx - Kyle Baysinger Case Hannah v Peel Court:Kings Bench Year:1945 Pg 178 Facts In 1938 Major Hugh Peel(defendant was

Property - Hannah v. Peel.docx - Kyle Baysinger Case Hannah...

This preview shows page 1 out of 1 page.

Kyle BaysingerCase: Hannah v. PeelCourt:King’s BenchYear:1945Pg: 178Facts: In 1938, Major Hugh Peel (defendant) was granted ownership of a house. There is no indication that Peel ever livedin the house. In 1940, Lance-Corporal Hannah (plaintiff) lived in the house while it was requisitioned for the quartering ofsoldiers. While there, Hannah found a brooch embedded in a windowsill. Hannah reported his find to the police, who held the brooch for two years. When no owner was found, the police gave the brooch to Peel, who sold it for 66£ in 1942. The brooch was subsequently resold by the jeweler for 88£.Procedural history:In 1943, Hannah sued for return of the brooch or for its value.Issues: Does the finder of lost chattel on another’s property have rights to that chattel superior to the rights of the property owner?Rules / Legal Principle: The owner of land possesses anything attached to or under the surface of the land, but not necessarily things lying on top.A finder of lost chattel on another’s property has rights to that chattel superior to the rights
Background image

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture