Trespass to Chattels
Share
Trespass to chattels, also known as trespass to goods or trespass to personal property, is a legal concept in tort law. It involves the intentional interference with another person's possession of personal property, which results in injury or harm to the owner. Trespass to chattels can apply to both tangible and intangible property. The key elements of trespass to chattels are:
Lack of consent: The interference with the property must be non-consensual. If the owner has given consent or authorised certain access to their property, a claim for trespass may not be valid unless the use exceeds the scope of that consent.
Actual harm: The interference must result in actual harm to the owner. The threshold for what constitutes actual harm can vary by jurisdiction. In some cases, damage or impaired functioning of the property may be required to establish a claim.
Intentionality: The interference must be intentional. The actor must perform the act with the purpose of using or intermeddling with the property, or with knowledge that such interference will likely occur as a result of the act. Knowledge that the action violates the possessory rights of another is not always necessary.
Traditionally, trespass to chattels primarily applied to tangible property, allowing owners to seek relief when someone interfered with their possession of personal property. However, the concept has been expanded to include intangible property, such as electronic communications or virtual property in online worlds.
In recent years, courts in the United States have recognised trespass to chattels in cases involving unauthorised use of long-distance telephone lines, unsolicited bulk email (spam), and unauthorised access to computer networks. The expansion of trespass to chattels has been driven by technological advancements and the need to protect individuals' interests in intangible property.
The injured party may seek various remedies for trespass to chattels, including monetary damages to compensate for any actual harm or loss suffered. Additionally, the court may grant injunctive relief to prevent further interference with the property or to order the return of the property to its rightful owner.
Lack of consent: The interference with the property must be non-consensual. If the owner has given consent or authorised certain access to their property, a claim for trespass may not be valid unless the use exceeds the scope of that consent.
Actual harm: The interference must result in actual harm to the owner. The threshold for what constitutes actual harm can vary by jurisdiction. In some cases, damage or impaired functioning of the property may be required to establish a claim.
Intentionality: The interference must be intentional. The actor must perform the act with the purpose of using or intermeddling with the property, or with knowledge that such interference will likely occur as a result of the act. Knowledge that the action violates the possessory rights of another is not always necessary.
Traditionally, trespass to chattels primarily applied to tangible property, allowing owners to seek relief when someone interfered with their possession of personal property. However, the concept has been expanded to include intangible property, such as electronic communications or virtual property in online worlds.
In recent years, courts in the United States have recognised trespass to chattels in cases involving unauthorised use of long-distance telephone lines, unsolicited bulk email (spam), and unauthorised access to computer networks. The expansion of trespass to chattels has been driven by technological advancements and the need to protect individuals' interests in intangible property.
The injured party may seek various remedies for trespass to chattels, including monetary damages to compensate for any actual harm or loss suffered. Additionally, the court may grant injunctive relief to prevent further interference with the property or to order the return of the property to its rightful owner.
