Chapter 1 Scenario questions

. Sebastian has recently purchased a large estate in the country. During the conveyancing process, he had a survey of the land completed, and it was found that there was a substantial aquifer (an underground layer of rock that holds groundwater) underneath the estate at a depth of 240 metres. Sebastian has also recently realised that his neighbours have large pipes entering their land close to the border of the two estates, with the pipes being angled towards his land. Does the aquifer form part of Sebastian's land, and if his neighbours are drawing water from the aquifer, are they trespassing?

The aquifer does not form part of the land as it belongs to the Crown, and therefore his neighbour drawing water would not constitute a trespass

The aquifer does form part of Sebastian's land, but there would be no trespass as there is a fundamental right to access water.

The aquifer does form part of Sebastian's land and his neighbour's drawing water would constitute trespass.

The aquifer does form part of Sebastian's land, but his neighbour has a right under s43 Infrastructure Act 2015 to extract the water and so is not committing a trespass.

. Sebastian is also worried around who has access to his airspace, as one of the primary reasons for purchasing the estate was avoid almost all other human beings. He has two issues: the members of a local aerodrome keep flying over the estate to practice their aerial photography, and another neighbour has erected a shed on the boundary of the estates that has a window ledge that protrudes on Sebastian's estate at a height of 2.5 metres and to a depth of 5 centimetres. Do either of these actions infringe Sebastian's airspace?

The aerial photography does not constitute an infringement, and the window ledge also does not constitute an infringement.

The aerial photography does not constitute an infringement, but the window ledge does constitute an infringement.

The aerial photography does constitute an infringement, and the window ledge does constitute an infringement.

The aerial photography does constitute an infringement, but the window ledge does not constitute an infringement.

. Nikita is in the process of purchasing a house, and after recently speaking to the seller, is worried about what will and will not be left on the land after the sale goes through. The items in question that Nikita is worried about are a portrait of the owner's grandfather that is hung in the main entrance hall and a sundial in the back garden (the sundial is cemented to the ground). Nikita thinks both of these items are integral to the nature of the property. Would they be treated as fixtures or chattels?

Both the portrait and the sundial will be treated a fixtures

Only the portrait will be considered a fixture, and the sundial will be treated as a chattel

Neither the portrait nor the sundial will be treated a fixture

Only the sundial will be considered a fixture, and the portrait will be treated as a chattel

. Hassan is in the process of selling a property, and is concerned about what he can and cannot take from the property. He has a number of pieces of garden furniture that were custom built for the garden and will not work architecturally in any other location. Hassan also has a small dinghy stored behind a shed. Will these items be considered fixtures or chattels?

Only the garden furniture will be considered fixtures, and the dinghy will be considered a chattel

Both the garden furniture and the dinghy will be considered fixtures

Only the dinghy will be considered a fixture, and the garden furniture will be considered chattels

Either the garden furniture nor dinghy will be considered fixtures, and all will be considered chattels

. Last month, whilst revising for her upcoming exams, Preeti found a gold pocket watch in a cupboard in her university's library – it looks to be about 150 years old. The cupboard was located in the 'Self-Study' section where most students work in silence and staff rarely visit, except for to clean and make periodic tours to ensure student behaviour. The cupboard itself was unlocked, and did not appear to have been opened for a long period of time. Having found the watch, Preeti handed it in to reception, and the University had no previous knowledge of the watch – indeed Preeti commented that "if it's not yours, does that make it mine then?" The University has had it appraised and valued at £456,678, and now plans to sell it despite Preeti's comments. Does Preeti have a valid claim to the watch?

No – because the watch would be considered 'treasure'

Yes – she has an automatic and irrebuttable right to the watch

No – because Preeti was trespassing on the University's land

Yes – because the University did not have control of the 'Self-Study' section and the watch was found on the land

Quiz Content