Suggested Answer to Exercise 3.2
Planning Your Answer
Issues
Was Jack entitled to remove the statue, the shed and the fitted carpets?
Rules
1. What is included in a sale of ‘land’?
Key Statute: LPA 1925, s 62. (Land Law, Sections 3.3 and 15.5.1(d)).
2. Distinguishing between fixtures and chattels.
The ‘two-stage test: Elitestone Ltd v Morris
Holland v Hodgson.
The statue (ornaments): D’eyncourt v Gregory
Re de Falbe
Berkley v Poulett
London Borough of Tower Hamlets v London Borough of Bromley
Iljadica, ‘Is a Sculpture “Land”?’ (2016) 80 Conv 242
The shed: Elitestone Ltd v Morris
Dibble (H E) Ltd v Moore [1970] 2 QB 181
Wessex Reserve Forces and Cadets Association v White
The carpets: Botham v TSB Bank plc
(Land Law, Section 3.5)
Answer Plan
1. Introduce the issues, the key concepts and why they are important.
- The distinction between fixtures and chattels.
- Why this distinction is significant in this case.
- A brief summary of the basic rules for recognizing a fixture.
2. Apply these rules to each of the items in turn. This is where you need to consider the rules in more detail, including the specific reasoning used in the decided cases. Does this reasoning apply here? With what result? What further issues does applying a particular case raise, if any?
a) The statue
b) The shed
c) The fitted carpet
3) Make sure that you have stated your conclusions and that these conclusions follow logically from your reasoning in 2(a-c).
Before you go to the next page, prepare a more detailed answer plan, including references to relevant cases and statutes.
