Ellis v Loftus Iron Company

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Year1865
Date1865
CourtDivisional Court
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
16 cases
  • Wormald v Cole
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal
    • 26 February 1954
    ...it was well established in the Fourteenth Century. 7 The action lies apart altogether from negligence, and as Mr Justice Brett put it in Ellis v. Loftus, which is reported in Law Reports lo Common Pleas at page 10, the mere act of an animal belonging to man may be a trespass inasmuch as the......
  • Bocardo SA v Star Energy UK Onshore Ltd
    • United Kingdom
    • Supreme Court
    • 28 July 2010
    ...animals or wires, is imprecise and it is mainly serviceable as dispensing with analysis: cf Pickering v Rudd [1815] 4 Camp 219 and Ellis v Loftus Iron Co (1874) LR 10 CP 10. In none of these cases is there an authoritative pronouncement that 'land' means the whole of the space from the cen......
  • Read v J. Lyons & Company Ltd
    • United Kingdom
    • House of Lords
    • 18 October 1946
    ...a case of pure trespass to property, and thus constitutes a wrong without any question of negligence. See per Lord Coleridge C.J. in Ellis v. Loftus Iron Co. (1874) L.R.10 C.P.10 at p. 12. The circumstances in Fletcher v. Rylands did not constitute a case of trespass because the damage was ......
  • Fitzgerald v E. D. and A. D. Cooke Bourns (Farms) Ltd
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal
    • 29 May 1963
    ...or to other animals upon it; see ( Lee v. Riley 1865 volume 18 Common Bench (New Series) page 722); ( Ellis v. Loftus Law Reports (1874) volume 1 Common Pleas, page 10). The duty arises because, in the modern idiom, the damage is foreseeable, and the owner of the trespassing cattle is exe......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 firm's commentaries
  • Q&A: The Extent Of A Right Of Way To Use Vehicles
    • United Kingdom
    • Mondaq UK
    • 31 July 2020
    ...over the land in possession of another. The act must be carried out without a licence or consent. References: Ellis v Loftus Iron Co [1874] LR 10 CP 10 Trespass extends to any unjustifiable intrusion by one person upon land in the possession of another. Indeed, it has been said that 'if the......
6 books & journal articles
  • Table of Cases
    • United Kingdom
    • Wildy Simmonds & Hill Restrictions on the Use of Land Preliminary Sections
    • 30 August 2016
    ...Ch 131, [1955] 3 WLR 892, [1955] 3 All ER 667, CA 3, 6 Elliott v Safeway Stores Plc [1995] 1 WLR 1396, ChD 285 Ellis v Loftus Iron Co (1874) LR 10 CP 10 190 Ellis v Worcestershire County Council (1961) 12 P & CR 178, LT 416 Elliston v Reacher [1908] 2 Ch 374, affirmed on appeal [1908] 2......
  • Public Rights of Way
    • United Kingdom
    • Wildy Simmonds & Hill Planning Law. A Practitioner's Handbook Contents
    • 30 August 2019
    ...a necessary condition. See Saper v Hungate Builders [1972] RTR 380. 246 HA 1980, s 140(2) and (3). 247 See e.g. Ellis v Loftus Iron Co (1874) LR 10 CP 10 at 12 per Lord Coleridge CJ – such an intrusion would ordinarily give rise to injunctive relief. The cause of action will cover not only ......
  • Table of Cases
    • United Kingdom
    • Wildy Simmonds & Hill Planning Law. A Practitioner's Handbook Contents
    • 30 August 2019
    ...143, 162, 287, 288 Eley v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2009] EWHC 660 (Admin) 278 Ellis v Loftus Iron Co (1874) LR 10 CP 10, 44 LJCP 24, 31 LT 483 569 Ellis v Worcestershire County Council (1961) 12 P & CR 178, Lands Tribunal 127 Emin v Secretary of State for......
  • Interferences with Public Highways
    • United Kingdom
    • Wildy Simmonds & Hill Restrictions on the Use of Land Part III. Public rights of way
    • 30 August 2016
    ...be a necessary condition. See Saper v Hungate Builders [1972] RTR 380. 40 HA 1980, s 140(2) and (3). 41 See e.g. Ellis v Loftus Iron Co (1874) LR 10 CP 10 at 12, per Lord Coleridge CJ – such an intrusion would ordinarily give rise to injunctive relief. The cause of action will cover not onl......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT