Of course it's just a tree.  What does it look like ?
RDG online
Restitution Discussion Group Archives
  
 
 

Restitution
front page

What's new?

Another tree!

Archive front page

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2007

2006

2008

2009

Another tree!

 
<== Previous message       Back to index       Next message ==>
Sender:
Allan Axelrod
Date:
Mon, 8 Dec 2003 11:56:35 –0500
Re:
Animal rights

 

agree that common law abandonment would preclude any lien: as to the owner getting back the animal without paying, i imagine that in the current US mood of sensitivity or sentimentality to animals, the finder would be given a medal as well as a lien rather than characterized as a mere interloper

Robert Stevens wrote:

In England it is assumed that there would be no such lien: Nicholson v. Chapman (1793), 2 H. Bl. 254; 126 ER 536.

Generally speaking, it is also assumed than necessitous interveners don't have a free standing claim to recover the expenses incurred. The Dogs' Home won't have a claim against an owner who is glad to see the back of the mutt.

Personally, I am attracted to the view that where a duty to intervene exists (section 149(1) Environmental Protection Act) so should a right to compensation for expenses incurred (section 149(5)).


<== Previous message       Back to index       Next message ==>

" These messages are all © their authors. Nothing in them constitutes legal advice, to anyone, on any topic, least of all Restitution. Be warned that very few propositions in Restitution command universal agreement, and certainly not this one. Have a nice day! "


     
Webspace provided by UCC   »
»
»
»
»
For editorial policy, see here.
For the unedited archive, see here.
The archive editor is Steve Hedley.
only search restitution site

 
 Contact the webmaster !