|
In the case where: (a) Party A, a local government, buried waste in a landfill 30 years previously, in which truckloads of waste were dumped onto the adjacent land that bordered the landfill; (b) afterward, Party B, who acquired ownership of the said adjacent land, performed excavation work and discovered a mixture of various household garbage, including plastic bags, wood, waste clothing, contaminated dirt, and construction waste buried underground at a depth of 1.5m to 4m, and the surrounding soil was contaminated to the point where its color had changed to black; (c) Party B filed a complaint against the local government for removal of waste materials, the case holding that: (a) such contamination that resulted from the local government’s illegal dumping of garbage in the past constitutes damage incurred to Party B, the land owner; (b) it cannot be deemed that the household garbage currently poses a separate violation of Party B’s ownership; (c) however, the lower court determined otherwise and granted Party B’s claim for removal of disturbance; and (d) in so determining, the lower court erred by misapprehending relevant legal principles
|
