SIETTOULOU ν. TRIMIKLINIOTIS
(1983)1 CLR 140 THE CYPRUS LAW REPORTS ΠΑΓΚΥΠΡΙΟΣ ΔΙΚΗΓΟΡΙΚΟΣ ΣΥΛΛΟΓΟΣ CyLaw | Αναφορικά μ'εμάς | " target="_top">Επικοινωνία | Όροι χρήσης Έρευνα - Κατάλογος Αποφάσεων - Εμφάνιση Αναφορών (Noteup on) - Αρχείο σε μορφή PDF - Αφαίρεση Υπογραμμίσεων
(1983)1 CLR 140 1982 December 15 [HADJIANASTASSIOU, LORIS, PIKIS, JJ.] CHRISTOFOROS SIETTOULOU, Appellant-Plaintiff, v. ANDREAS TRIMIKLINIOTIS, Respondent-Defendant. (Civil Appeal No. 6337). Trespass to land-Extent of land alleged to be trespassed upon very small-Impossibility of establishing trespass over area of such a small extent. Practice-Adjournment-Leading to piling of costs altogether out of proportion to the dispute-Deprecated-court refraining from making an order for costs. This was an appeal against a judgment dismissing plaintiff's action for trespass. According to the evidence of a D.L.O. clerk the trespass was committed over an area of 5-6 sq. feet; and according to another D.L.O. clerk the trespass was over a smaller area ranging from half to two feet. Held, that although the judgment of the trial Court is not as well reasoned, as it might be, having regard to the evidence, and not altogether happily worded, nevertheless, there is little room for this Court to interfere having regard to the evidence before the Court and the virtual impossibility of establishing trespass over an area of such a small extent; accordingly the appeal must fail.
(2)That the costs incurred in this case, because of the numerous adjournments for which this Court expresses its consideration, were altogether out of proportion to the dispute of the parties; accordingly this Court will refrain from making an order for costs. Appeal dismissed. Appeal. Appeal by plaintiff against the judgment of the District Court of Limassol (Artemis, D.J.) dated the 10th October, 1981 (Action No. 512/77) whereby his action for trespass and nuisance committed by the defendant by an encroachment on his land was dismissed. K. Kyriakides, for the appellant. A. Neocleous, for the respondent. HADJIANASTASSIOU J. gave the following judgment of the Court. This is an appeal against the decision of the District Court of Limassol dismissing an action for trespass and nuisance, allegedly committed by the respondent at the expense of the appellant by an encroachment on his land adjoining to that of the respondent, and the alteration of existing state of affairs in connection with a water channel and the flow of water over the roof of a building standing on the land of the respondent. The facts. Before the trial Court there was evidence coming mainly from the parties and two D.L.O. clerks tending to shed light on the boundaries of the properties and the responsibility of a trespass and nuisance having been committed. The parties offered conflicting evidence as the trial Court noted, whereas the evidence of the two clerks was found to be inconclusive. One of them spoke of the possibility of a trespass having been committed over an area of 5 - 6 sq. ft, whereas the other spoke of a possibility of encroachment over a still smaller area ranging from half to two feet. The unevenness of the surface made the task of this witness harder still and in the end as both stated before the trial Court they could not ignore the possibility of an error in their calculations. To put himself better in the picture the trial Judge visited the locus without success. Speaking of such a small area a visit to the locus was hardly designed to reveal whether there existed a trespass over such a small area of land. Finally the trial Court dismissed both the action for trespass and nuisance with costs against the appellant. Appeal The appeal was directed against both parts of the judgment but at the hearing before us the decision entailing the dismissal of the action for nuisance was withdrawn. Today we are only concerned to decide the correctness of the decision regarding the the question of trespass. Although the judgment of the trial Court is not as well reasoned, as it might be, having regard to the evidence, and not altogether happily worded, nevertheless, there is little room for us to interfere having regard to the evidence before the Court and the virtual impossibility of establishing trespass over an area of such a small extent. That being the case, we feel constrained to dismiss the appeal and uphold the judgment. Before concluding we must express our consternation at the time taken to conclude this case because of the numerous adjournments and the costs that eventually piled up. With this in mind we do not feel we shall exceed the limits of our discretion if we refrain from making an order for costs in this appeal. We have the feeling that the costs incurred in this case are altogether out of proportion to the dispute of the parties. This is a factor to be taken into consideration in adjudging costs. Appeal dismissed without costs. Appeal dismissed without costs. cylaw.org: Από το ΚΙΝOΠ/CyLii για τον Παγκύπριο Δικηγορικό Σύλλογο