Finders Law Essay

For:

The main objective of finders’ law is to reunite the true owner with their lost property. As Cheapa and the Queensland Police proved unsuccessful at doing this, the general rule of ‘finders keepers’ may apply. Rules and obligations of the finder can be extracted from Parker v British Airways Board. Lord Justice Donaldson states that:

1. “The finder of a chattel acquires no rights over it unless (a) it has been abandoned or lost…”

2. “The finder of a chattel acquires very limited rights over it if he takes it into his care and control with dishonest intent or in the course of trespassing.”

Billy and Bobby’s actions satisfy these rules. As outlined above, the money was abandoned or lost. In addition, they were not trespassing, as you had authorised them to have access to the car. Finally, Billy and Bobby did not display dishonest intent, as they passed on the money to their scout leader.

Ruling in favour of the finder is present in Bridges v Hawkesworth . Bridges (the plaintiff) finds a parcel containing money in Hawkesworth’s, (the defendant’s) shop. Bridges acts honestly and hands the money to Hawkesworth, requesting that he attempt to find the true owner. This attempt

In Elwes v Brigg Gas Company, a valuable chattel was discovered on Elwes’ land, which was leased to Brigg Gas Company. It was held that the chattel “did not pass to the lessees by the demise, but was the property of the lessor though he was ignorant of its existence at the time of granting the lease”. On the basis of the facts provided, it is likely that the money was placed in your rental car prior to Cheapa agreeing to rent it out to you. They only checked the car externally, opposed to internally, as they usually would between rentals. Therefore, it is reasonable to state that they were ignorant of its existence when they granted your