Harvard Law School Library

Bracton Online -- English

Previous   Volume 2, Page 46  Next    

Go to Volume:      Page:    

[001] where a person has built on his own land with another's materials; he is taken to
[002] be the owner of the building because everything built into it cedes to the land. He
[003] who was owner of the materials does not cease to own them, but he cannot recover
[004] what is his own; he will obtain their double value. If the building is destroyed he
[005] may recover his property, unless he has secured the double value. Conversely, if
[006] one in bad faith builds with his own materials upon another's land, he is presumed
[007] to have given him the materials; if in good faith, let the owner of the land pay him
[008] the price of the materials and the wages of the workmen. The above is true where
[009] the building is immovable; if it is mobile the rule will be otherwise, as where a
[010] barn for the new wheat, made of wooden planks, is placed on Sempronius's estate;
[011] it will not become his property. This kind of accession produced by the intervention
[012] of human action may be seen in connection with letters. For writing, though in
[013] letters of gold, becomes part of parchments and charters exactly as things built
[014] upon land or crops sown become part of the soil. But a contrary rule will apply to
[015] paintings. It would be ridiculous if by accession a valuable painting became part
[016] of a worthless panel. Thus the panel cedes to the painting, [as explained more
[017] fully in the Institutes,15 and it may there be found [and] in the Summa that in
[018] some cases the position of the possessor is the weaker.16 Also in the same that his
[019] position is the stronger because of the two-fold advantage of possessing.17 Also
[020] in the same, that where the rights of each are obscure, judgment will be given for
[021] the possessor.] The same sort of accession may be seen in connection with textiles,
[022] for if one has woven the purple thread of another into his vestment, though the
[023] purple is the more valuable it nevertheless becomes part of the vestment by
[024] [right] of accession. The same kind of accession may be seen in connection with
[025] usufructuaries and usuaries of land, in connection with gaining the fruits.18

Of accession made by natural and human forces jointly.

[027] With respect to them 19the accession by which dominion is acquired will be a
[028] combination of natural and human action, as where Titius places another man's
[029] shrub in land belonging to himself, the shrub will be his. And conversely, if Titius
[030] plants his own shrub in soil belonging to Maevius, it will belong to Maevius, provided
[031] in each case that the shrub takes root, for until it does so it remains the property of
[032] its original owner. And it is also true that if a neighbour's tree so encroaches on the
[033] land of Titius that it strikes its root into his soil, the tree will belong to Titius.
[034] Reason does not permit it to belong to any other than to him in whose land it is
[035] rooted. So if a tree is placed on the boundary of two estates and strikes root into a
[036] neighbour's land, it will be the common property of the two landowners, nor will the
[037] neighbour be permitted to cut off the roots. This


15. Inst. 2.1. 34

16. Azo, Summa Inst. 2.1, no. 42: ‘Et mirabile videtur contingere quod deterior sit condicio possessoris.’

17. Ibid: ‘potest dici melior conditio possidentis propter duplex beneficium,’

19. Br. and Azo, 115, 120-22

19-20. Azo, Summa Inst. 2.1, no. 45

Contact: specialc@law.harvard.edu
Page last reviewed April 2003.
© 2003 The President and Fellows of Harvard College