- Land is not simply physical i.e. soil, grass + buildings but the RIGHTS people have in land.
- There are TWO distinct categories:
1) Corperal hereditaments- the actual land such as a house which can be passed down by someone to their heirs e.g. buildings, property etc.
2) Incorperal hereditaments- a 'right'; not a visible/physical ownership of land. An 'intangible' right passed down by someone to their heirs, who will have a new 'right' to property. Ownership of a right of way over someone else's property
- In corperal hereditaments, there are distinctions between FIXTURES and CHATTELS:
1) Rests on a factual basis
- although basic principles established, no. of cases have been decided on individual facts - so in one case a seat can be a fixture, whilst in another can be a chattel
- Law of Property Act 1925 s.205(1)(ix) - Statutory definition of Land; includes the surface, buildings/parts of building, whatever is attached to the land and becomes part of the land
Land Law: Fixtures and Chattels
- Important to distinguish between fixtures and chattels
1) Fixtures:- attached to the land; realty
2) Chattels:- personal items belonging to the owner; personalty
- There are TWO tests for determining whether an object is a fixture or chattel:
1) 1st Test= DEGREE OF ANNEXATION; if object is annexed to the land, it is prima facie a FIXTURE
- Holland v Hodgson (1872); spinning looms bolted to floor of factory were attached with bolts so therefore held to be fixtures
- Hume v Brigham ; Heavy free-standing printing presses stood on floor held to be chattels, not attached to the floor.
- Chelsea Yacht & Boat Co. v Pope ; houseboat moored to the bank moving up and down a tide was considered to be a chattel
2) 2nd Test= PURPOSE OF ANNEXATION;
- Test created by Blackburn J in Holland v Hodgson
- considers TWO questions which must be asked:-
1) Was chattel affixed to land for better enjoyment of object as a chattel? (therefore more likely to be a chattel)
2) Was it affixed for a more convenient use of land? (therefore more likely to be a fixture)
- Creates a paradox as the same object can be a fixture in one case, and a chattel in another.
For example; Leigh v Taylor - Held that tapestries nailed to a wall were NOT fixtures.
Re Whaley -…