From: Lionel Smith, Prof. <lionel.smith@mcgill.ca>
To: Martin Hogg <Martin.Hogg@ed.ac.uk>
Andrew Tettenborn <A.M.Tettenborn@EXETER.AC.UK>
CC: ODG <obligations@uwo.ca>
Date: 23/02/2010 16:42:52 UTC
Subject: Re: Conversion with a human face

In Quebec, we have both possibilities:


DIVISION II

ACQUISITION OF VACANT PROPERTY


§ 1. -  Things without an owner


934. Things without an owner are things belonging to no one, such as animals in the wild, or formerly in captivity but returned to the wild, and aquatic fauna, and things abandoned by their owner.

Movables of slight value or in a very deteriorated condition that are left in a public place, including a public road or a vehicle used for public transportation, are deemed abandoned things.


935. A movable without an owner belongs to the person who appropriates it for himself by occupation.

An abandoned movable, if no one appropriates it for himself, belongs to the municipality that collects it in its territory, or to the State.


936. An immovable without an owner belongs to the State. Any person may nevertheless acquire it by natural accession or prescription unless the State has possession of it or is declared the owner of it by a notice of the Minister of Revenue entered in the land register.


But abandonment is not applicable in the case of treasure (art. 938) nor in the case of things that are simply forgotten (arts. 939 ff). Full English text is at

http://www2.publicationsduquebec.gouv.qc.ca/dynamicSearch/telecharge.php?type=2&file=/CCQ/CCQ_A.html

Lionel


On 23-02-10 11:01 , "Martin Hogg" <Martin.Hogg@ed.ac.uk> wrote:




Like Bill, I find this a fascinating case (thanks for the reference,

Andrew). Similar facts must happen all the time, particularly in the

purchase of domestic property. My brother, for instance, recently

bought an old farmhouse, and was irritated on taking possession to

find one of the stables full of old junk which had been left behind by

the previous owner. His precise circumstances would not have been

helped by the decision of Mr Edelman QC, however, the farmhouse being

in Scotland. As, under Scots law, the abandonment of property

transfers ownership in it to the Crown, this puts my unhappy brother

in a rather difficult position: does he destroy the property even

though this technically constitutes destruction of Crown property (not

that I imagine the Crown would want all the junk which had been left

behind)?


I would be interested to learn of the position in other jurisdictions.


Martin Hogg

Edinburgh Law School




--

The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in

Scotland, with registration number SC005336.