Chattel House In Ramdass V. Bahaw-Nanan

1008 Words5 Pages
The main issue to be addressed is whether a chattel house is a fixture or not.
Lord Walker in Ramdass v. Bahaw-Nanan describes a chattel house as a “wooden structure which was used for human habitation but which, because of its structure, modest size and lack of solid foundations, could be physically and legally removed to another site. So if it had been built by a tenant he could remove it at the end of his tenancy.”
It was also a crucial aspect to consider the movability as the tenant possess the ability to move the chattel house from one site to another .Evident in the recognition of such chattel house derived the existence of two types that were available .It included either traditional houses that could have been easily moved or a cemented foundation with a permanent wall. This suggested that there was no longer an ease of
…show more content…
According to the degree of annexation test, an article is a fixture if it is attached to land or building in a substantial manner such as by nails and screws. The more firmly or irreversibly the object is affixed to the earth or building, the more likely it is to be classified a fixture. .there must be a physical connection with the land or with something that is part of the land and

More about Chattel House In Ramdass V. Bahaw-Nanan

Open Document