trespass — MCQs

All questions with answers and explanations

Read the full set here, or use the practice card above to test yourself one question at a time.

1. Trespass to land is best described as:

   • Any interference with land, however indirect
   • A direct and unauthorised interference with a person's possession of land (correct answer)
   • Only interference caused with intent to harm
   • The same thing as nuisance

   Explanation. Trespass to land is a direct and unauthorised interference with a person's possession of land — directness is the key distinguishing feature.

2. Which statement about trespass is correct?

   • The plaintiff must prove actual damage for trespass to succeed
   • Trespass is actionable per se — no damage need be proved (correct answer)
   • Trespass can only be committed negligently, never intentionally
   • Trespass protects ownership but not mere possession

   Explanation. Trespass is actionable per se — the mere fact of unauthorised direct entry is itself a wrong, without needing proof of damage.

3. A factory pipe discharges liquid waste directly onto a neighbour's field. This is:

   • Nuisance only
   • Trespass, since the interference is direct (correct answer)
   • Negligence only
   • Not actionable unless damage is proved

   Explanation. A direct discharge onto another's land is trespass, because the interference is the immediate result of the defendant's own act.

4. Smoke from a factory drifts on the wind and settles on a neighbour's crops. This is best classified as:

   • Trespass, since harm resulted
   • Nuisance, since the interference is indirect/consequential (correct answer)
   • Absolute liability
   • None of the above — no remedy exists

   Explanation. Since the smoke's effect is a consequence carried by an intervening natural process (wind), not a direct deposit, the remedy lies in nuisance, not trespass.

5. In Jones v. Llanrwst Urban District Council (1911), the council was held liable in trespass because:

   • It failed to obtain a pollution licence
   • The sewage it discharged into the river was carried directly to the plaintiff's land, a direct consequence of the discharge (correct answer)
   • It was negligent in maintaining its drains
   • The plaintiff suffered no damage at all

   Explanation. The court held the discharge into the flowing river directly caused the deposit on the plaintiff's downstream land — a direct, not merely consequential, result.

6. Which of the following is NOT one of the three essentials of trespass to land?

   • Direct interference
   • Absence of lawful justification
   • Interference with possession
   • Proof of actual financial loss (correct answer)

   Explanation. Proof of actual financial loss is not required — trespass is actionable per se. The three essentials are directness, absence of lawful justification, and interference with possession.

7. Which remedy is most effective against a continuing or repeated trespass by pollution?

   • Nominal damages alone
   • An injunction restraining further deposits (correct answer)
   • Filing a criminal complaint only
   • Waiting for the trespass to stop on its own

   Explanation. An injunction is the primary and most effective remedy against a continuing trespass, since damages alone rarely stop a repeat polluter.

8. A tenant in exclusive possession of leased land (not the owner) discovers a neighbour has dumped waste directly on it. Can the tenant sue in trespass?

   • No, only the owner can sue in trespass
   • Yes, because trespass protects possession, not necessarily ownership (correct answer)
   • No, trespass requires proof of ownership documents
   • Only if the tenant also owns adjoining land

   Explanation. Trespass protects a person's possession of land — even a tenant or licensee in exclusive possession can sue, ownership is not required.