1467 Words 6 Pages

There are two issues on which Stephanie requires advice - whether the barge is a chattel or a fixture and whether there is a valid contract in place between herself and Wangle. If the barge has become a fixture of the land and the contract meets all the necessary formalities, then Stephanie may have a legal right to the barge and may have a cause of action against Wangle if he refuses to go through with the transaction.

Distinguishing between Chattels and Fixtures

The Law of Property Act 1925 s. 62 (1) states that a conveyance to the land includes, but is not limited to, all buildings, erections and fixtures of the land. If the barge is a fixture rather than a chattel, then Stephanie would have a legal claim to the property. In order to determine if the barge is a fixture, two tests will need to be applied.
…show more content…
The test focused on the “degree of annexation” and the “purpose of annexation”, asking the question whether the object was attached to the land for the improvement of the land or whether it was put there to better enjoy the object as a chattel. Elitestone v Morris (1997) further improved upon this two-prong test and became the senior authority on the matter. Lord Lloyd in Elitestone expanded the distinction between fixture and chattel to include “part and parcel” of the land determining that the bungalow had formed part of the realty, despite its lack of attachment to the land. Distinguishing an object as a chattel or a fixture is highly fact-dependent and while the degree of annexation remains a vital component, the second element of the test has come to dominate the

Related Documents