LawTeacher logo
LawTeacher The law essay professionals
0115 966 7966 Today's Opening Times 10:00 - 19:00 (BST)

Young v Dalgety [1987] 1 EGLR 116

The nature of tenant’s fixtures

Facts

The appellant landlord entered into a lease which required the tenant to covenant to install light fittings and flooring to the property. The tenant complied with its obligation under the covenant by fitting lights comprising of fluorescent tubes contained in plastic boxes which were screwed into the plaster of the ceiling. The flooring was laid with carpets attached by gripper rods at the edges which were fixed to the floor with pins. When it became necessary for a rent review to be carried out, the landlord argued that these items were landlord fixtures and were subject to the valuation for review. The tenant argued that they were tenant’s fixtures which could be removed. The judge at first instance found in favour of the tenant and the landlord appealed.

Issue

The issue in this circumstance was whether items affixed to a property as a requirement of a covenant in a lease became part of the property or remained tenant’s fixtures which could be removed.

Held

It was held firstly, that the covenant did not affect the nature of ownership of the items. It was secondly held, on the presumption that the items were fixtures rather than purely chattels, that because it was accepted that fixtures attached by a tenant to a property for the purposes of their trade or business are tenant’s fixtures and can be removed, the trial judge had been correct on the evidence available in asserting that these items were tenant’s fixtures. The landlord’s appeal was dismissed.


To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below:

Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Invest In Your Future Today!
Place an Order