Land Law IV – Fixtures and Chattels

In Monti v Barnes (1901) we look into whether fixtures, when they are taken out and replaced, by something that is different but serves the same purpose, remain as fixtures or if they are to be regarded as chattels.

According to the facts of the case the mortgagor removed from the house a number of ordinary fixed grates and replaced them with dog grates which were considerably lighter which were not in any way affixed to the freehold and the question before the court was whether the new dog grates were to be regarded as fixtures or as chattels.

In coming to a decision, the court decided that it needed to look into the intention of the mortgagor at the time he replaced the grates or substituted the grates and it was obvious that “he could not have intended for the house to be without grates”.

The question that had to be asked was, having regard to the character of the articles (grates) and the circumstances of the case, whether the articles were intended to be annexed to the freehold or if they were intended to continue as chattels and the court decided that it was the former i.e. that the articles had become a permanent feature of the freehold and were to be regarded as fixtures.

Copyright © 2019 by Dyarne Jessica Ward

You may also like

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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