Canadian Law: Lost, Mislaid, and Abandoned Property Report

This report delves into the intricacies of Canadian property law, specifically focusing on the legal classifications and implications of lost, mislaid, and abandoned property. It begins by defining these terms, differentiating between situations where an item is unintentionally left, intentionally placed but forgotten, or deliberately discarded. The report examines the rights and responsibilities of finders, including the concept of 'finders keepers' and the exceptions to this rule. It analyzes the role of property law in the legal system of the common law. Additionally, it explores the application of these principles in the context of innkeeper's liability, including the statutory rules governing hotels and their responsibilities for lost or stolen belongings of their guests, emphasizing the concept of negligence per se. The report references key legal precedents and scholarly articles to support its analysis.

Running head: Lost, mislaid and abandoned property in canada
LOST, MISLAID AND ABANDONED PROPERTY IN CANADA
Name of the student
Name of the university
Author note

1Lost, mislaid and abandoned property in canada
Mislaid, lost and abandoned properties are the class of the common legislation of
property that concern with chattel or property of personal nature that left the rightful owner’s
possession without entering into the ownership of another individual (Holland, 2018). The
property can be regarded as mislaid, lost or abandoned that rests on the situations by which it is
held by the next person obtaining possession. It is apparent from the old proverb that possession
is of nine-tenths of legislation that go out with centuries. That implies in many situations the
person who possesses part of the land is construed as to have rightful ownership without having
proof to the contrary. Colloquially it may be termed as keepers, finders (Pearce, 2018). The
contradictions that held to the norm are theft by finding that may happen if there is an occurrence
of conversion after discovering the property of someone else. Property is deemed to be lost is it
is discovered from the place where the person who is the true owner has no intention to keep it
there. The finder of misplaced things could claim possession right of the item against the
individual except for the person who is the true owner (Longchamps & Wright, 2007). The
finder of item attain no right from the mislaid property, however, it is authorized to claim
possession from lost item against the individual except the true owner of the lost property.
Property is said to be abandoned if it is discovered in the place where it is intended by the true
owner to leave it there but in a state which indicates that there is no intention exist on the part of
the owner to reclaim it( Cabrera, 2017). The question of fact involving is to determine who has
possession right of the lost item. This category of property is regulated by property law under the
legal system of the common law.

2Lost, mislaid and abandoned property in canada
The liability of hotels for lost belongings of the guest is the statutory rule that regulates
the case termed as innkeeper’s liability. The legislative that govern the liability of hotel for stolen
items depends on circumstances. The hotel liability can be claimed under the notion of
negligence per se that indicates the actions are held to be negligent by infringement of statutes.
References
Cabrera, M. J. (2017). Access and benefit-sharing, intellectual property rights and the protection
of traditional knowledge in Costa Rica: Participation in and possible impacts of the IGC’s
work. In Protecting Traditional Knowledge (pp. 277-288). Routledge.
Holland, T. D. (2018). Novel Features of Considerable Biologic Interest: The Fourth
Amendment and the Admissibility of Abandoned DNA Evidence. Colum. Sci. & Tech. L.
Rev., 20, 271.
Longchamps, D., & Wright, B. H. (2007). Canadian Hospitality Law (3rd ed.).
Pearce, W. P. (2018). The North Dakota Supreme Court Deals With the Abandoned Minerals
Act. NDL Rev., 93, 355.