List: LW109: Foundations of Property Law Section: Subtopic A: Trespass Next: The apex of an oil field 29 Thursday Jul 2010 If you are already a subscriber, please enter your details below to log in. They entered the substrata below land owned by B at substantial depths beneath the surface. The owner of the surface of land was the owner of the strata beneath it, including the minerals that were to be found there, unless there had been an alienation of them by a conveyance, at common law or by statute to someone else. The issues were (i) whether B's title to the land extended down to the strata below the surface through which the wells passed; (ii) whether possession or a right to possession was a precondition for bringing a claim for trespass and, if so, whether B had or was entitled to possession of the subsurface strata through which the wells passed; (iii) whether S had a right under the Petroleum (Production) Act 1934 to drill and use the wells to extract petroleum from beneath B's land which gave it a defence to a claim in trespass; (iv) the proper approach to assessing damages. That was the view of the Court of Appeal in Mitchell v Mosley [1914] 1 Ch. By continuing to use the website, you consent to our use of cookies. The entire wiki with photo and video galleries for each article There was nothing in s.10(3) of the 1934 Act (re-enacted in the, ) or the context in which it was enacted that restricted the reference to "land" in that subsection to things that happened only on the surface. Bocardo SA v Star Energy UK Onshore Ltd and another [2008] EWHC 1756 (Ch) 2. It is not every day, or even every year, that the highest court in the United Kingdom passes judgement in an oil and gas case. The principles, including the principle established in. EBSCOhost serves thousands of libraries with premium essays, articles and other content including Bocardo SA v Star Energy UK Onshore Ltd and another. There had obviously to be some stopping point, as one reached the point at which physical features such as pressure and temperature rendered the concept of the strata belonging to anybody so absurd as to be not worth arguing about. Bocardo SA v Star Energy UK Onshore Ltd [2010] UKSC 35, [2011] 1 AC 380. 575. The words "interfere with" were not restricted to interfering with the owner's use and enjoyment of the land for the time being. Furthermore, while it 562. The principles, including the principle established in Pointe Gourde Quarrying & Transport Co v Sub-Intendent of Crown Lands [1947] A.C. 565, ordinarily governing the approach to valuation in the field of compulsory land purchase applied equally to the construction and application of s.8(2) of the 1966 Act in respect of the compulsory acquisition of ancillary rights over or under land, Pointe Gourde applied. There was nothing in s.10(3) of the 1934 Act (re-enacted in the Petroleum Act 1998 s.9(2)) or the context in which it was enacted that restricted the reference to "land" in that subsection to things that happened only on the surface. Star Energy held such an exclusive licence to an area that included lands underlying Bocardo s farm. 1. Corporate, Partnership & Personal Insolvency, Professional Negligence & Regulation/Discipline. To what extent can it be said that the decisions in Bocardo v Star Energy 2010 UKSC 35 and Elitestone v Morris 1997 IWLR 687 were accurate interpretations of the common law definitions of land. The owner of the surface of land was the owner of the strata beneath it, including the minerals that were to be found there, unless there had been an alienation of them by a conveyance, at common law or by statute to someone else. New Judgment: Star Energy Weald Basin Limited & Anor v Bocardo SA [2010] UKSC 35. To learn about our use of cookies and how you can manage your cookie settings, please see our Cookie Policy. The respondent, Star Energy Weald Basin, was an oil exploration company which had been drilling in the Palmers Wood Oil Field, whose north-east part extended under the land of the appellant, Bocardo. subscribers. (Lord Clarke dissenting, and Lord Hope dissenting in part, on the fourth issue) (1) (Per Lord Hope) B's title did extend down to the strata below the surface through which the wells passed. That was the view of the Court of Appeal in Mitchell v Mosley [1914] 1 Ch. Torts: Star Energy Weald Basin Ltd v Bocardo SA [2010] UKSC 35 Star Energy Weald Basin Ltd v Bocardo SA [2010] UKSC 35 Issue An energy company had carried out activities involving extraction of oil underneath a property without the title owner’s permission. Description . Star Energy Weald Basin Limited and another (Respondents) v Bocardo SA (Appellant) before Lord Hope, Deputy President Lord Walker Lord Brown Lord Collins Lord Clarke JUDGMENT GIVEN ON 28 July 2010 Heard on 22, 23 and 24 June 2010. Bocardo SA v Star Energy Ltd (2010) Summary. Informa UK Limited is a company registered in England and Wales with company number 1072954 whose registered office is 5 Howick Place, London, SW1P 1WG. Informa UK Limited is part of Informa PLC. In the context of a statute which was concerned with the right to search for, bore for and get petroleum existing in its natural condition in strata below ground, the words "enter on" were apt to apply to underground workings as well as workings on the surface itself. Ibid. Add to My Bookmarks Export citation. more. Decisions in Bocardo v Star Energy. The post To what extent can it be said that the decisions in Bocardo v Star Energy 2010 UKSC 35 and Elitestone v Morris 1997 IWLR 687 were accurate interpretations of the common law definitions of land. This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them. … This item appears on. Close, i-law is part of the Business Intelligence Division of Informa PLC. Assignment status: Already Solved By Our Experts (USA, AUS, UK & CA Ph. (2) (Per Lord Hope) Possession or a right to possession was a precondition for bringing a claim for trespass. But the wells in this case were far from being so deep as to reach the point of absurdity; indeed, the fact that the strata could be worked upon at the depths in question pointed to the opposite conclusion. Appeal from – Star Energy UK Onshore Ltd and Another v Bocardo Sa CA (Bailii, [2009] EWCA Civ 579, [2010] Ch 100, [2010] 1 All ER 26, [2009] 25 EG 136, [2009] 2 P and CR 23, [2009] 3 WLR 1010, [2009] NPC 78) The appellant had taken out a licence to drill for oil on its land. Martyr v Lawrence (1864) 2 … Number 8860726. Appellant … Essential Cases: Land Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. Preview. (2) (Per Lord Hope) Possession or a right to possession was a precondition for bringing a claim for trespass. It was considered of such importance that the Government made submissions to the Court of Appeal, arguing against the decision of the High Court. But the wells in this case were far from being so deep as to reach the point of absurdity; indeed, the fact that the strata could be worked upon at the depths in question pointed to the opposite conclusion. The owner of the surface of land was the owner of the strata beneath it, including the minerals that were to be found there, unless there had been an alienation of them by a conveyance, at common law or by statute to someone else. The Assessment Task . Case Commented On: Star Energy Weald Basin Limited v Bocardo SA, [2010] UKSC 35. The owner of the subsurface was entitled to say that his land was being interfered with when it was bored into by someone else. Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. that the respondent oil company (S) had committed an actionable trespass. Bocardo SA v Star Energy Onshore UK Ltd Squire Patton Boggs United Kingdom August 31 2010 An energy company had carried out activities … S had a licence to search for, bore for and get petroleum. Jonathan Gaunt QC and Edward Peters appeared for Bocardo SA. There had obviously to be some stopping point, as one reached the point at which physical features such as pressure and temperature rendered the concept of the strata belonging to anybody so absurd as to be not worth arguing about. The issues were (i) whether B's title to the land extended down to the strata below the surface through which the wells passed; (ii) whether possession or a right to possession was a precondition for bringing a claim for trespass and, if so, whether B had or was entitled to possession of the subsurface strata through which the wells passed; (iii) whether S had a right under the Petroleum (Production) Act 1934 to drill and use the wells to extract petroleum from beneath B's land which gave it a defence to a claim in trespass; (iv) the proper approach to assessing damages.

Mary Maxim Latch Hook Kits, Ngos In Auroville, Cream Cheese Tatura 250g, Hurricane Nicole 2018, Dolmio Tomato And Basil Stir In, Pearl Texture Photoshop, Zillow Fort Lauderdale Rent,