The law of finding is characterised by many things but simplicity is Essay

The law of finding is characterised by many things but simplicity is not one of them - Essay Example providing some basic principles and guidelines for the determination of title to the finding of lost chattels.3 Even so, any clarification offered by Parker v British Airways Board has been blurred in light of the cases that followed it.4 Hoath goes on to suggest that the catalyst for the lack of clarity in and around the law of finding disputes is largely attributable to the lack of attention and recognition to this area of law. 5 At the end of the day the age-old maxim ‘finders-keepers’ is not all that straightforward. An obvious conflict arises between he maxim ‘finder-keepers’ and the concept that an owner or occupier of land retains all rights to property which is either in or attached to the land where the object is discovered. In an early case the maxim ‘finder-keepers’ was found to be subject to any claims by the rightful owner.6 In this case, Armory v. Delamirie (1722) 1 Str. 505 the land owner made no claim to an item of jewelry found by a chimney sweeps’ boy and the ensuing dispute arose between the boy and a jeweler.7 The modern rules of ‘finders-keepers’ is largely developed around the court’s findings in the case of Elwes v Brigg Gas Co. (1886) 33 Ch.D. 562. Chitty J made it abundantly clear that in finding disputes the critical question of property entitlement was dependant upon ownership and/or lawful possession of the property where the lost object was discovered. In this case a prehistoric boat which had been buried 6 feet deep in the earth on demised premises was discovered by lessee. Chitty J maintained that the owner of the demised property was entitled to possession of the object uncovered. Chitty J held: he was in possession of the ground, not merely of the surface, but of everything that lay beneath the surface down to the centre of the earth, and consequently in possession of the boat. . . . The plaintiff then, being thus in possession of the chattel, it follows that the property in the chattel was vested in him.