Reynolds v Ashby and Son: HL 1904

Machines had been affixed to the premises. The court was asked whether they were caught by a fixed charge over the company’s land and fixed assets.
Held: The machines were fixed by bolts only and no damage would be caused to the building by their removal. Nevertheless, the machines were part of the mortgaged property. In Hobson v Gorringe, Blackburn J ‘was contemplating and referring to circumstances which shewed the degree of annexation and the object of such annexation which were patent for all to see, and not to the circumstances of a chance agreement that might or might not exist between the owner of a chattel and a hirer thereof.’
Lord Lindley observed that: ‘The purpose for which the machines were obtained and fixed seems to me unmistakable; it was to complete and use the buildings as a factory. It is true that the machines could be removed if necessary, but the concrete beds and bolts prepared for them negative any idea of treating the machines when fixed as movable chattels.’

James, Lindley LL
[1904] AC 466, [1904-7] All ER Rep 401
England and Wales
Citing:
ApprovedHobson v Gorringe CA 1897
The intention of the parties in affixing an object to land is only relevant to the extent that it can be derived from the degree and object of the annexation: ‘the intention of the parties as to the ownership of the chattel fixed to the land is only . .

Cited by:
CitedElitestone Ltd v Morris and Another HL 1-May-1997
The plaintiff acquired land on which 27 chalets were erected. They served notice to quit so that the site could be developed. The defendants argued that they had residential tenancies with protection under the Rent Act 1977.
Held: The tenants’ . .
CitedRe Hi-Fi Equipment (Cabinets) Limited ChD 11-Jun-1987
The company had charged by way of a first fixed charge all future freehold and leasehold property together with trade fixtures and otherwise. The company used heavy machinery which rested on the floor of its premises. The chargee claimed a fixed . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.240415