Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Airspace
Airspace
How high?
Latin Maxim
Cujus est solum ejus est usque ad coelum et ad
inferos
Legal Method
Issue
Rule
Application
Conclusion
1
Legal Method
Issue
What is the legal issue or question that you
need to answer?
Legal Method
Issue
Rule
Analyze the law and determine the rule.
Legal Method
Issue
Rule
Application
Apply the rule to the scenario presented to you.
2
Legal Method
Issue
Rule
Application
Conclusion
Answer the question or provide advice.
Problem
Property Law Reader, p. 165
Question 4
Airspace
Kelsen v. Imperial Tobacco (1957)
3
Airspace
Kelsen v. Imperial Tobacco (1957)
“a trespass and not a mere nuisance was created by
the invasion of the plaintiff’s airspace by this
sign.”
Airspace
Bernstein (Lord of Leigh) v. Skyviews (1978)
Airspace
Bernstein (Lord of Leigh) v. Skyviews (1978)
“It may be a sound and practical rule to regard any
incursion into the air space at a height which may
interfere with the ordinary user of the land as a
trespass rather than a nuisance. Adjoining owners then
know where they stand …
But wholly different considerations arise when
considering the passage of aircraft at a height which in
no way affects the user of the land. .”
4
Airspace
Bernstein (Lord of Leigh) v. Skyviews (1978)
Airspace
Manitoba (Min. of Finance) v. Air Canada (1978)
Airspace
Manitoba (Min. of Finance) v. Air Canada (1978)
5
Airspace
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea
Article 2(2)
Airspace
Didow v. Alberta Power Ltd. (1988)
“The two concepts which become apparent are firstly,
that the courts will not give literal effect to the Latin
maxim and secondly, the property remedy for
interference with a landowner’s air space with a
permanent fixture is in trespass as opposed to
nuisance.”
Airspace
Didow v. Alberta Power Ltd. (1988)
“a landowner is entitled to freedom from permanent
structures which in any way impinge upon the
actual or potential use and enjoyment of his land.
The cross-arms constitute a low level intrusion which
interferes with the appellant’s potential, if not actual,
use and enjoyment. This amounts to trespass.”
6
Airspace
Didow v. Alberta Power Ltd. (1988)
overhanging cranes?
“In light of the distinction now recognized in
encroachment cases between nuisance and trespass
my inclination would be to characterize the
overhanging crane as a nuisance.”
Airspace
Didow v. Alberta Power Ltd. (1988)
but…
“I agree with the opinion stated of Griffiths in Lord
Bernstein of Leigh v. Skyviews … that low flying
aircraft might very well constitute a trespass.”
Airspace Parcels
New York
7
Land Title Act
138 In this Part:
"air space parcel" means a volumetric parcel,
whether or not occupied in whole or in part by a
building or other structure, shown as such in an air
space plan;
"air space plan" means a plan that
(a) is described in the title to it as an air space plan,
(b) shows on it one or more air space parcels
consisting of or including air space …
8
Strata Property Act