APPRAISAL OF TRESPASS AS A TORTIOUS ACTION UNDER THE LAW OF TORT
Emily Cortez
Published Feb 09, 2026
ABSTRACT
There is no branch of law which transpires the true picture of the society more than the law of tort. The reason being that it is a branch of law that deals with the conduct of the people amongst themselves. Because of the contact people have with themselves in the environment, there are bound to be fiction which will bring about injuries or wrong whether direct or in indirect and for this reason, the law of tort is put in place to compensate persons harmed by the wrongful conduct of others.
One of the major aspects of tort is Trespass. The term trespass has been used in different senses by Lawyers and laymen but the most acceptable of all is that Trespass is the unlawful interference with one`s person, land, and chattel. The law of trespass seeks to protect or compensate it`s victim and its bases is the prevention of breaches of peace. Trespass can be classified into three types namely; Trespass to Person, Trespass to Land, and Trespass to Chattel.
Trespass to person is any direct and immediate interference with personal liberty which is actionable parse and it comprises of Battery, Assault, and False Imprisonment. Trespass to land is the entering upon another person`s land without permission whether forcible or not. Trespass to land can be by wrongful entry, remaining on land, placing things on land, and trespass above and beneath the surface of land. Trespass to chattel us a direct and wrongful interference in the possession of another. Conversion and Detinue come under trespass to chattel and there is no doubt that there are differences between the two even though they seem similar.
This research work seeks to examine the principles of law applicable to Trespass to person, Trespass to land, and Trespass chattel which form the major classifications of Trespass with a view to enlightening the general public. Moreover, there are cases where a person may seek to justify his actions. Such justifications in law are known as defences. These defences shall be examined in the course of this research work.
TABLE OF CONTENT
CHAPTER 1
GENERAL INTRODUCTION
1.0.0: INTRODUCTION
1.1.0: BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY
1.2.0: OBJECTIVES OF STUDY
1.3.0: FOCUS OF STUDY
1.4.0: SCOPE OF STUDY
1.5.0: METHODOLOGY
1.6.0: LITERATURE REVIEW
1.7.0: DEFINITION OF TERMS
1. 8.0: CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 2
TRESPASS TO PERSON
2. 0.0: INTRODUCTION
2.1.0: BATTERY
2.2.0: ASSAULT
2.3.0: FALSE IMPRISONMENT
2.4.0: DEFENCE OF PERSON OR PROPERTY
2.4.1: DEFENCE OF CONSENT
2.4.2: DEFENCE OF LAWFUL ARREST
2. 5.0: CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 3
TRESPASS TO LAND
3. 0.0: INTRODUCTION
3.1.0: TRESPASS BY WRONGFUL ENTRY
3.2.0: TRESPASS BY REMAINING ON LAND
3.3.0: TRESPASS BY PLACING THINGS ON LAND
3.4.0: TRESPASS ABOVE AND BENEATH THE SURFACE OF LAND
3.5.0: INTERFERENCE WITH POSSESSION
3.6.0: DOES SELF-HELP CONSTITUTE A VALID DEFENCE?
3.7.0: DEFENCE OF LICENCE
3.7.1: DEFENCE OF JUSTIFICATION
3. 8.0: CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 4
TRESPASS TO CHATTEL
4. 0.0: INTRODUCTION4.1.0: TRESPASS ACTIONABLE PERSE
4.2.0: CONVERSION
4.2.1: CONVERSION BY TAKING
4.2.2: CONVERSION BY USING
4.2.3: CONVERSION BY WRONGFUL TRANSFER OF TITLE
4.2.4: CONVERSION BY DETENTION
4.3.0: DETINUE
4.4.0: DEFENCE
4. 5.0: CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 5
GENERAL CONCLUSION
5. 0.0: CONCLUSION
5.1.0: RECOMMENDATIONBIBLIOGRAPHY
ARTICLES ON THE INTERNET
BOOKS
CHAPTERS IN BOOKS
TABLE OF CASES
Table of Contents
ENGLAND
• Fouldes v Willoughby (1841) 157 ER 1153.
• Gibbons v PEPPER (1695) 91 ER 922.
• Lane v Holloway (1967) 3 ALL ER 129.
• Lavender v Betts (1942) 2 ALL ER 72.
• Meering v Graham-Waite Aviation (1919) 22 LT 44.
• Mulgrave v Ogden (1591) 78 ER 475.
• Murray v Minister of Defence (1988) 2 ALL ER 521.
• R v Day (1841) 173 ER 1026.
• Read v Coker (1853) 138 ER 1437.
• Stephen v Myers (1830) 172 ER 735.
• Williams v Gesse (1837) 132 ER 637.
GHANA
• Tormekpey v Ahiable (1975) 2 GLR 432.
NIGERIA
• Aboyeji v Momoh [1994] 4 NWLR (Pt 341) P.646 SC.
• Abudumanya v Alhajiliasuldris (2001) 8 NWLR (Pt 716) P. 627.
• Adebanjo v Brown [1990] 3 NWLR (Pt 141) 661 SC.
• Adebomi v Orejobi [1976] 9 CCHCJ 2401.
• Afribank [Nigeria] Plc v Onyima [2004] 2 NWLR (Pt 858) 654 CA.
• Agbahwe Osayiobasa [1966] NWLR P.360.
• Ajao v Ashiru [1973] ALL NLR (Pt 11) P.51.
• Ajibulu v Ajayi [2004] 11 NWLR (Pt 885)458 CA.
• Amodu v Ajiboye [2001] FWLR (Pt 46) 845.
• Ayanlaja v Lawal [2002] FWLR (Pt 88) 545.
• Balogun v Alakija [1963] 2 All NLR 175.
• Balogun v Akanji [2005] Vol. 11 MJSC 175.
• Boniface Anyika& Co Lagos Nigeria Ltd v Uzor [2006] ALL FWLR (Pt 1836) P.1853.
• Chukwuma v Ifeloye [2008] 18 NWLR (Pt 1118) 204 SC.
• Chukwuiah v C.F.A.O Motor Ltd [1967] FNLR 168.
• Civil Design Construction [Nig] Ltd v SCOA [Nig] Ltd [2007] Vol. 5 MJSC 142.
• Davies v Lagos City Council [1973] 10 CCHCJ 151.
• Ekpan v Uyo [1988] 3 NWLR (Pt 26) P.63.
• Eirvo v Obi [1993] 9 NWLR (Pt 316) P.60 CA.
• Hart v Ezekiel –Hart [1987] 4 NWLR {Pt 63} 105.
• Henry Stephens Engineering Limited v S.A Yakubu Migeria Limited [2009] 10 NWLR 416 SC.
• Ishemo v Julis Berger Nigeria Plc [2008] Vol.4 MJSC 104.
• Kari v Ganaram [1997] 2 NWLR (Pt 488) 380.
• Koroye v West African Examination Council [1974] 12 CCHCJ 1853.
• Lawal v Deputy Superintendent of Police [1975] 2 WSCA 72.
• Lufthansa v Odiese [2006] 7 NWLR {Pt 978} 257.
• Nkume v Registerd Trutee Of the Synod Of Diocese on the Niger [1998] 10 NWLR {Pt 570} 514.
• Nwanka v Ajaegbu [1978] 2 LNR 230.
• Odum v Uganda [2009] 9 NWLR 281 CA.
• Oniah v Onyiah [1989] 1 NWLR (Pt 99) 514.
• Onasanya v Emmamuel [1973] 4 CCHCJ 1477.
• Osuji v Isiocha [1989] 3 NWLR {Pt 3} 623.
• Owema Bank v Olatunji [2002] 13 NWLR {Pt 781] 259.
• Saliba v Yassin [2002] FWLR [Pt 98} 68.
• Silli v Mosoka [1997] 1 NWLR (Pt 479) 98.
• Totor v Aweh [2000] NWLR (Pt 644) 309 CA.
• Umeobi v Otukoya [1978] 1 LRN 192.
• West African Oilfields Services Limited v UAC of Nigeria Limited [2001] FWLR (Pt 39) 1413.
• Zenon Petroleum& Gas Ltd v Idrisyya {Nig} Ltd [2006] 8 NWLR 221 CA.
SIERRA LEONE
• Attorney-General [Sierra Leone] v Kamara [1937] 3 WACA 157.
UNITED KINGDOM
• Christopher v Bare [1848] 11 QB (Pt 473) 477.
• Collins v Wilcock. [1984] 1 WLR 1172
• Entick v Carrington 2 Wills KB 275.
• Forge v Skinner [1830] 4 C&P 239.
• Hope v Osborne [1913] 2 CH 349.
• Kelsen v Imperial Tobacco Co. Ltd [1957] 2 QB 334.
• Willson v Pringe [1987] QB 237.
• Wollerton v Ltd v Costain Ltd [1970]1 WLR 411
TABLE OF STATUTE
ENGLAND
• Interpretation Act 1958, Cap. 89 LFN 2004.
NIGERIA
• Bill of Exchange Act Cap B8 LFN 2004.
• Criminal Code Cap C38 LFN 2004.
• Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999, Cap. 24, LFN 2004.
• Divisional Administration (Amendment) No. 2 Edict 1972.
• Sales of Goods Act Of 1893.
