| 单词 | Rule of distress damage feasant |
| 释义 | 扣押引致損害的實產 A common law rule that provides for the right to distrain any chattel being unlawfully on the land of a person and doing damage, instead of the right to bring an action for trespass: Ambergate, Nottingham and Boston and Eastern Junction Rly Co v Midland Rly Co (1853) 2 E & B 793. The person entitled to the possession of the land may seize the chattel, detain it or impound it in order to compel the owner to make compensation for the damage caused by the chattel: Halsbury’s Laws of Hong Kong, Vol 25, Tort [380.387]. There must not only be trespass but also actual damage either to land or other chattels: Arthur v Anker [1997] QB 564, [1996] 3 All ER 783, [1996] 2 WLR 602. The right may not be exercised until the owner of the chattel has had a reasonable opportunity to remove the chattel: Goodwyn v Cheveley (1859) 28 LJ Ex 298, 4 H & H 631, 23 JP 487. While the chattel is distrained, no legal proceedings can be brought for any part of the damage distrained for: Boden v Roscoe (1894) 1 QB 608. See also Damage; Distrain; Distress. 普通法的規則，提供扣押任何非法地在一人的土地上及作出損害的實產的權利，以取代提出侵入行為的訴訟：Ambergate, Nottingham and Boston and Eastern Junction Rly Co v Midland Rly Co (1853) 2 E & B 793。有權管有土地的人可檢取，扣押或扣管實產，以迫使擁有人作出由實產導致的損害賠償：Halsbury’s Laws of Hong Kong, 第25冊，侵權，第[380.387]段。除必須有侵入行為外，還須對土地或其他實產有實際的損害：Arthur v Anker [1997] QB 564, [1996] 3 All ER 783, [1996] 2 WLR 602。直到實產的擁有人曾有合理的機會移走有關的實產，才可行使此權：Goodwyn v Cheveley (1859) 28 LJ Ex 298, 4 H & H 631, 23 JP 487。在扣押有關實產時，不可提出任何受到該實產導致損害的法律訴訟程序：Boden v Roscoe (1894) 1 QB 608。另見 Damage; Distrain; Distress。 |
| 随便看 |
|
法律词典收录了8080条英汉双解法律词条，基本涵盖了常用法律英语单词及短语词组的翻译及用法，是法律学习的有利工具。