Posted: September 16th, 2022

IRAC

Issue 1: Does the term of the lease forbid the parking of a caravan?
Rule/s: A caravan in one’s garden enjoys a ‘mobile’ status if the same is considered as incidental to the enjoyment of that individuals home; which means it is an addition to the individual’s home and not a separate unit. But in the event that the individual owner of the caravan intends that the same be a separate dwelling place then he or she will be forced to obtain a planning permission. The same should not obstruct any footway or road.
The mere fact that Jenny has had the caravan on the bench block of the land for many years without being questioned to remove is an indication that is not obstructing any footway or road and further there is no mention that the same is being used as a dwelling place hence no need to obtain a planning permission.
Application: The caravan being a conspicuous object must have been seen by the lessor, Bob who has not questioned or raised any concern to the caravan’s existence in the land.
Conclusion: Therefore it is obvious that the placement of the caravan on the bench block of the land does not violate any term of the lease.
Issue 2: Does the caravan constitute a fixture or a chattel
Rule/s: Chattels refer to items that constitute personal property, Fixtures on the other hand refer to chattels attached to land that become part of the said land. There is need to distinguish the two as it determines the ownership of the item in question. A fixture will always belong to land owner whereas a chattel may belong to another person different to the owner of the land.
Application: The caravan is physically attached to the land thus it is a prima facie indication that it constitutes a fixture and not a chattel, although the physical attachment does not mean that its conclusive that it is a fixture as when it becomes a question for determination before a court of law the court have to consider both the degree of annexation and object of annexation to determine whether the same constitutes a fixture or a chattel.
Conclusion: The caravan did not form part of the realty as was never used by Jenny as a dwelling house and as such remained a chattel. Though the caravan has sunk into the soil thus posing difficulties to tow it away Jenny did not intended that the same be permanent structure and the fact that it’s found on the surface of the land and not under the surface it still belongs to Jenny thus she is entitled to remove so long as she makes good any damage that is to occur from the removal.

References
Leigh vs Taylor[1902] AC 157 obtained from http://www.e-lawresources.co.uk/cases/
Lyon & Co vs London City and Midbank [1903] 2 KB 135 obtained from http://www.e-lawresources.co.uk/cases/
Elitestone Ltd vs Morris and Another [1997] 1 WLR 687 obtained from http://www.e-lawresources.co.uk/cases/
Elwes vs Brigg Gas Company (1886) 33 Ch D 562 obtained from http://www.e-lawresources.co.uk/cases/
Waverley Borough Council vs Fletcher [1995] 4 All ER 756 obtained from http://www.e-lawresources.co.uk/cases/
Mew & Anor v Tristmire [2012] 1 WLR 852 Court of Appeal obtained from http://www.e-lawresources.co.uk/cases/
Fixtures and chattels: http://www.e-lawresources.co.uk accessed at 4.00 pm

Order | Check Discount