Robson v. Hallett

Home » Case Law » Robson v. Hallett
  1. Case Title & Citation
    Robson v. Hallett, [1967] 2 Q.B. 939 (Eng. C.A.).

  2. Decision Summary (Neutral Overview)
    Police officers entered private property and an altercation followed. The question was whether their presence was lawful or whether they had become trespassers.

The Court held:

  • There is an implied licence for anyone, including police, to approach a front door to knock and seek admission.

  • That licence can be revoked by the occupier.

  • Once revoked, continued presence becomes trespass.

  1. Historical & Legal Context
    Robson is a staple case in English common law on trespass and the limits of implied licence. It’s often cited in criminal procedure and property courses.

  2. Key Legal Principles Identified in the Case

  • Entry on land is not always trespass—there may be an implied licence.

  • However, that licence is narrow and revocable.

  • Remaining after revocation equals trespass.

  1. Implications for Haldimand, Loyalist, and Mohawk Questions

  • Robson offers a simple way to explain that long-standing tolerance of Crown or municipal presence on Haldimand lands does not equal permanent consent.

  • Mohawk posterity can formally “revoke the licence” and insist that further occupation or exercise of jurisdiction is trespassory.

  1. Points of Interest to Mohawk of Grand River Posterity

  • The case helps clarify the difference between practical cooperation (allowing shared use for safety or convenience) and legal surrender of rights.

  • It supports the idea that a clear assertion by Mohawk authorities—“you are no longer welcome to exercise authority here”—has legal meaning.

  1. Unresolved Questions / Future Research Directions

  • How might a court apply the concept of revocable licence to entire systems (e.g., policing, highway presence, tax collection) rather than one-time visits?

  • Could letters, public notices, or court filings serve as formal revocations of implied licence on Haldimand lands?

  1. Sources

  • Robson v. Hallett, [1967] 2 Q.B. 939.

  • Property and criminal procedure commentary.

289 words

Sign up to the Newsletter!
Get the latest articles and news delivered to your mailbox.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Categories


About Benjamin Doolittle U.E.

listen to BLOODLINE

“Bloodline” follows the Haldimand Proclamation from its original promise to the present fight to have it honoured. The track moves through Crown grants, broken commitments, and the legal and political road back to enforcement, asking listeners to hear the Proclamation not as a relic of the past, but as a living obligation that still binds the Crown to the Mohawk Nation of Grand River.

Artist: One Way Current
Writer: Benjamin Doolittle UE
Producer: One Way Current
Publisher: Corn Press Publications
Affiliation: Six Miles Deep / Mohawk Nation of Grand River

WHITE PAPER

CROWN PLUS

Crown Plus is an initiative of the Mohawk University, dedicated to restoring truth, lawful continuity, and honour in the interpretation and application of the Haldimand Proclamation of 1784 — the foundational covenant between the Mohawk Nation and the British Crown.

This paper is divided into three parts, each exploring a distinct dimension of the Haldimand covenant: its legal origins, its modern violations, and the path toward lawful restoration. Together, they form the living record of a truth that has been long buried beneath colonial misinterpretation.Crown Plus stands for the principle that the Mohawk Nation is not a subject of the Crown, but a co-sovereign pillar upon which the Canadian state itself rests.

The phrase “Crown Plus” reclaims the language of Canada’s political history — a response to the White Paper (1969) and Red Paper (1970) — and reframes it in the Mohawk context. Where others spoke of “citizens plus,” we assert “Crown Plus”: the indivisible bond of alliance, honour, and hereditary right between the Mohawk and the Crown.

Part I — The Legal Foundations and Historical Continuity

Explores the origins of the Haldimand Proclamation, the Dorchester correction, the Mohawk–Crown alliance since Queen Anne, and the constitutional distinctiveness of the Mohawk Loyalist posterity.

Part II — Modern Violations, Fiduciary Duties, and Institutional Responsibility

Documents the breach of fiduciary duty by Crown agents, the propagation of false land acknowledgements, and the complicity of academic, corporate, and judicial institutions in sustaining unlawful occupation.

Part III — Framework for Restoration, Recommendations, and the Path Forward

Outlines a ten-year restoration plan, proposes the Mohawk Posterity Registry and Royal Commission of Continuity, and reaffirms the spiritual and legal covenant through the Crown Plus Initiative.