Define: Continuing Trespass

Continuing Trespass
Continuing Trespass
Quick Summary of Continuing Trespass

Continuing Trespass refers to a legal concept where a person unlawfully enters or remains on another person’s property without permission. This offence is considered ongoing as long as the trespasser remains on the property without authorization. The act of continuing trespass is generally prohibited by law and can result in civil liability or criminal charges, depending on the jurisdiction.

Full Definition Of Continuing Trespass

Continuing trespass, a concept within the broader legal framework of tort law, involves a persistent, unlawful intrusion upon another’s land or property. This legal principle addresses scenarios where the trespass is not a singular event but continues over time, causing ongoing harm or interference. Understanding continuing trespass is crucial for property owners and legal professionals, as it affects property rights, available remedies, and the duration of liability.

Definition and Elements of Continuing Trespass

Continuing trespass can be defined as an ongoing unlawful interference with one’s possession of the land where the trespasser remains or leaves behind an object or structure on the property. For a claim of continuing trespass to be valid, several elements must be established:

  1. Unlawful Interference: The defendant must have entered or caused something to enter the claimant’s land without permission or legal right.
  2. Continuity: The trespass must be ongoing, indicating a persistent presence or effect rather than a single occurrence.
  3. Possession: The claimant must have had legal possession of the land during the trespass.
  4. Lack of Consent: The interference must occur without the landowner’s or lawful possessor’s consent.

Legal Precedents and Case Law

The development of the law concerning continuing trespass is grounded in various legal precedents. Notable cases have shaped the interpretation and application of this tort:

  • Holmes v. Wilson (1839): This early case involved the defendant’s continued presence on the plaintiff’s land after erecting buttresses. The court held that each day the structures remained constituted a new trespass, establishing the principle that continuing trespass can lead to successive claims.
  • Midwood v. Manchester Corporation (1905): This case addressed the issue of sewage leakage from the defendant’s property onto the plaintiff’s land. The court ruled that the ongoing leakage constituted a continuing trespass, allowing for remedies despite the passage of time.
  • Kelsen v. Imperial Tobacco Co (1957): An advertising sign extending into the claimant’s airspace was deemed a continuing trespass in this case. The decision underscored that trespass can involve physical land and the airspace above it.

Remedies and Legal Recourse

Property owners affected by continuing trespass have several remedies available, depending on the nature and severity of the trespass:

  1. Injunctions: A common remedy for continuing trespass is an injunction, a court order requiring the trespasser to cease the offending activity. Depending on the circumstances, injunctions can be interim (temporary) or perpetual (permanent).
  2. Damages: Monetary compensation may be awarded to the claimant for any harm or loss from trespass. This can include compensatory damages for actual losses and, in some cases, exemplary damages to punish particularly egregious conduct.
  3. Self-Help: In certain situations, the property owner may take direct action to remove the trespassing object or structure. This must be done without breaching the peace or causing additional harm.

Defences Against Claims of Continuing Trespass

Defendants in continuing trespass cases may raise several defences to mitigate or negate liability:

  1. Consent: If the defendant can prove that the claimant consented to the presence or activity, the trespass claim may fail.
  2. Statutory Authority: In some cases, the trespasser may have acted under statutory authority, which can provide a defence against trespass claims.
  3. Necessity: A defence of necessity may be invoked if the trespass was conducted to prevent greater harm or danger, such as entering the property to extinguish a fire.

Limitations and Statutory Considerations

The Limitation Act 1980 imposes time limits on bringing claims for trespass. Typically, a claimant has six years from the date the trespass occurred to file a claim. However, in cases of continuing trespass, this period can reset with each new day the trespass persists. This means a claimant can potentially bring an action long after the initial trespass began, provided it is still ongoing.

Distinction Between Continuing Trespass and Nuisance

While continuing trespass and nuisance involve ongoing interferences, they are distinct legal concepts. Trespass concerns unlawful entry onto land, whereas nuisance involves interference with the use and enjoyment of land. Continuing trespass requires direct physical invasion, while nuisance can involve indirect actions such as noise or odours. Understanding these distinctions is crucial for correctly framing legal claims and seeking appropriate remedies.

Practical Considerations for Property Owners

Property owners facing continuing trespass should consider the following steps:

  1. Documenting the Trespass: Keeping detailed records, including photographs and logs of the trespass, can strengthen the claimant’s case.
  2. Seeking Legal Advice: Consulting with a legal professional early on can help you understand the options and strategize the best course of action.
  3. Negotiation and Mediation: In some cases, resolving the issue through negotiation or mediation may be preferable to lengthy litigation.

Impact of Technological and Environmental Changes

Technological advancements and environmental changes have introduced new dimensions to continuing trespass. For instance, the rise of drones has led to cases involving airspace trespass, while environmental concerns have heightened awareness of ongoing pollution as a form of continuing trespass. Courts are increasingly called upon to adapt traditional principles to these modern contexts.


Continuing trespass remains a vital area of tort law, protecting property owners from ongoing unlawful interferences. Claimants and defendants can navigate this complex legal landscape more effectively by understanding the elements, legal precedents, remedies, and defences associated with continuing trespass. As societal and technological changes evolve, so will the application and interpretation of continuing trespass, ensuring its relevance in safeguarding property rights.

Continuing Trespass FAQ'S

Continuing trespass refers to the act of unlawfully remaining on someone else’s property without their permission, even after being notified to leave.

Yes, continuing trespass can be considered a criminal offense in many jurisdictions, depending on the circumstances and the applicable laws.

The consequences of continuing trespass can vary, but they may include fines, imprisonment, or both, depending on the severity of the offense and the jurisdiction’s laws.

Property owners generally have the right to use reasonable force to remove a continuing trespasser from their property, but the level of force allowed may vary depending on local laws and the specific situation.

Yes, a property owner can file a civil lawsuit against a continuing trespasser to seek damages for any harm or losses caused by the trespasser’s actions.

To prove continuing trespass, a property owner may need to provide evidence such as photographs, videos, witness statements, or any other documentation that demonstrates the trespasser’s ongoing presence on the property without permission.

Some potential defences against a continuing trespass claim may include consent from the property owner, mistaken belief of permission, or necessity due to an emergency situation. However, the availability and success of these defences may vary depending on the specific circumstances and applicable laws.

In some cases, a continuing trespasser may attempt to claim adverse possession rights, which is a legal doctrine that allows someone to gain ownership of another person’s property through continuous and open use for a specified period. However, the requirements for adverse possession vary widely by jurisdiction, and it is generally difficult for a trespasser to successfully claim such rights.

Yes, a continuing trespasser can be held liable for any damages caused to the property during their unauthorized presence. The property owner may seek compensation for repairs, restoration, or any other losses resulting from the trespasser’s actions.

Related Phrases
No related content found.

This site contains general legal information but does not constitute professional legal advice for your particular situation. Persuing this glossary does not create an attorney-client or legal adviser relationship. If you have specific questions, please consult a qualified attorney licensed in your jurisdiction.

This glossary post was last updated: 13th June 2024.

Cite Term

To help you cite our definitions in your bibliography, here is the proper citation layout for the three major formatting styles, with all of the relevant information filled in.

  • Page URL:
  • Modern Language Association (MLA):Continuing Trespass. DLS Solicitors. June 20 2024
  • Chicago Manual of Style (CMS):Continuing Trespass. DLS Solicitors. (accessed: June 20 2024).
  • American Psychological Association (APA):Continuing Trespass. Retrieved June 20 2024, from website:
Avatar of DLS Solicitors
DLS Solicitors : Family Law Solicitors

Our team of professionals are based in Alderley Edge, Cheshire. We offer clear, specialist legal advice in all matters relating to Family Law, Wills, Trusts, Probate, Lasting Power of Attorney and Court of Protection.

All author posts