Online Encyclopedia

Search over 40,000 articles from the original, classic Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th Edition.

FIXTURES (Lat. figere, to fix)

Online Encyclopedia
Originally appearing in Volume V10, Page 452 of the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica.
Spread the word: del.icio.us del.icio.us it!

See also:

FIXTURES (See also:Lat. figere, to See also:fix)  , in See also:law, chattels which have been so fixed or attached to See also:land (as it is expressed in See also:English law, " so annexed to the See also:freehold "), as to become, in contemplation of law, a See also:part of it . All systems of law make a marked distinction for certain purposes, between immovables and movables, between real and See also:personal See also:property, between land and all other things . In the See also:case of See also:fixtures the question arises under which set of rights they are to fall—under those of real or of personal property . The See also:general See also:rule of English law is that everything attached to the land goes with theland—quicquid plantatur See also:solo, solo cedit . This, like many other rules of English law, is all in favour of the freeholder; but its hardship has been modified by a large number of exceptions formulated from See also:time to time by the courts as occasion arose . In See also:order to constitute a fixture there must be some degree of See also:annexation to the land, or to a See also:building which forms part of it . Thus it has been held that a See also:barn laid on blocks of See also:timber, but not fixed to the ground itself, is not a fixture; and the onus of showing that articles not otherwise attached to the land than by their own See also:weight have ceased to be chattels, rests with those who assert the fact . On the other See also:hand, an See also:article, even slightly affixed to the land, is to be considered part of it, unless the circumstances show that it was intended to remain a See also:chattel . The question is one of fact in each case—depending mainly on the mode, degree and See also:object of the annexation, and the possibility of the removal of the article without injury to itself or the freehold . In certain cases the courts have recognized a constructive annexation, when the articles, though not fixed to the See also:soil, pass with the freehold as if they were, e.g. the keys of a See also:house, the stones of a dry See also:wall, and the detached or duplicate portions of See also:machines . Questions as to the property in fixtures principally arise—(1) between landlord and See also:tenant, (2) between See also:heir and executor, (3) between executor and See also:remainder-See also:man or reversioner, (4) between seller and buyer . 1 .

At See also:

common law, if the tenant has affixed anything to the freehold during his occupation, he cannot remove it without the permission of his landlord . But an exception was established in favour of See also:trade fixtures . In a case before See also:Lord See also:Holt it was held that a See also:soap-See also:boiler might, during his See also:term, remove the vats he had set up for trade purposes, and that not by virtue of any See also:special See also:custom, but " by the common law in favour of trade, and to encourage See also:industry," and it may be stated as a general rule that things which a tenant has fixed to the freehold for the purpose of trade or manufacture may be taken away by him, whenever the removal is not contrary to any prevailing practice, or the particular terms of the See also:contract of tenancy, and can be effected without causing material injury to the See also:estate or destroying the essential See also:character of the articles themselves (See also:Lambourn v . M°Lellan, 1903, 2 Ch . 269) . Agri-cultural tenants are not entitled, at common law, to remove trade fixtures . But the Landlord and Tenant See also:Act 1851 granted such a right of removal in the case of buildings or machinery erected by atenant at his own expense, and with his landlord's consent in See also:writing, provided that the freehold was not injured or that any injury was made See also:good, and that before removal a See also:month's written See also:notice was given to the landlord, who had an See also:option of See also:purchase . Under the Agricultural Holdings Act 1883 the tenant might, under similar conditions, remove fixtures, although the landlord had not consented to their erection . The Agricultural Holdings Act 1900 extended this See also:provision to fixtures or buildings acquired, although not annexed or erected, by the tenant . Similar rights were created by the Allotments See also:Compensation Act 1887, and by the See also:Market Gardeners' Compensation Act 1895 . All these provisions were re-enacted by the Agricultural Holdings Act 1908 . Again, ornamental fixtures, set up by the tenant for See also:ornament and convenience, such as hangings and looking-glasses, See also:tapestry, See also:iron-backs to chimneys, See also:wainscot fixed by screws, See also:marble See also:chimney-pieces, are held to belong to the tenant, and to be removable without the landlord's consent .

Here again the extent of the See also:

privilege has been a See also:matter of some uncertainty . In all these cases the fixtures must be remo\ed during the term . If the tenant gives up See also:possession of the premises without removing the fixtures, it will be presumed, it appears, that he has made a See also:gift of them to the landlord, and that presumption probably could not be rebutted by See also:positive See also:evidence of a contrary intention . His right to the fixtures is not, however, destroyed by the See also:mere expiry of the term, if he still remains in possession; but if he has once See also:left the premises he cannot come back and claim his fixtures . In one case where the fixtures had actually been severed from the See also:free-hold after the end of the term, it was held that the tenant had no right to recover them . 2 . As between heir and executor or See also:administrator . The question of fixtures arises between these parties on the See also:death of a See also:person owning land . The executor has no right to remove trade fixtures, set up for the benefit of the See also:inheritance . As regards ornamental See also:objects, the rule quicquid plantatur solo, solo cedit was in See also:early times somewhat relaxed in favour of the executor . As far back as 1701, it was held that hangings fixed to a wall for ornament passed to the executor; and, although the effect of this relaxation was subsequently cut down, it is supported by the decisions of the courts affirming the executor's right to valuable tapestries affixed by a tenant for See also:life to the walls of a house for ornament and their better enjoyment as chattels (See also:Leigh v . See also:Taylor, 1902, App .

Phoenix-squares

Cas . 157) ; and the same has been held as to statues and See also:

bronze See also:groups set on pedestals in the grounds of a See also:mansion house . 3 . When a tenant for life of land See also:dies, the question of fixtures arises between his representatives and the persons next entitled to the estate (the remainder-man or reversioner) . The remainder-man is not so See also:great a favourite of the law as the heir, and the right to fixtures is construed more favourably for executors than in the preceding cases between heir and executor . Whatever are executor's fixtures against the heir would therefore be executor's fixtures against the remainder-man . And the result of the cases seems to be that, as against the remainder, the executor of the tenant for life would be certainly entitled to trade fixtures . Agricultural fixtures are not removable by the executor of a tenant for life . 4 . As between seller and buyer, a purchase of the lands includes a purchase of all the fixtures . But here the intention of the parties is of great importance . Similar questions may arise in other cases, e.g. as between mortgagor and mortgagee .

When land is mortgaged the fixtures pass with it, unless a contrary intention is expressed in the See also:

conveyance; and this even where the chattels affixed are the subject of a hire purchase agreement (See also:Reynolds v . See also:Ashby, 1903, 1 K.B . 87) . Again, in reference to bills of See also:sale the question arises . Bills of sale are dispositions of personal property similar to mortgages, the possession remaining with the person selling them . To make them valid they must be registered, and so the question has arisen whether deeds conveying fixtures ought not to have been registered as bills of sale . Unless it was the intention of the parties to make the fixtures a distinct See also:security, it seems that a See also:deed of See also:mortgage embracing them does not require to be registered as a See also:bill of sale . The question of what is or is not a fixture must also often be considered in questions of rating or See also:assessment . The law of See also:Scotland as to fixtures is the same as that of See also:England . The Agricultural Holdings (Scotland) Acts 1883 (ss . 35, 42) and 1900 (as to market gardens) give a similar statutory right of removal . The law of See also:Ireland has been the subject of the special legislation sketched in the article LANDLORD AND TENANT .

The See also:

French See also:Code See also:Civil recognizes the right of the usufructuary to remove articles attached by him to the subject of his estate on the expiry of his term, on making good the See also:place from which they were taken (See also:Art . 599) and there are similar provisions in the Civil Codes of See also:Italy (Art . 495) See also:Spain (Arts . 487, 489), See also:Portugal (Art . 2217) and See also:Germany (Arts . 1037, 1049) . The law of the See also:United States as to fixtures is substantially identical with English common law . Constructive, as well as actual, annexation is recognized . The same relaxations (from the common law rule quicquid plantatur solo, solo cedit) as regards trade fixtures, and ornamental fixtures, such as tapestry, have been recognized . In See also:Mauritius the provisions of the Code Civil are in force without modification . In See also:Quebec (Civil Code, Arts . 374 et seq.) and St See also:Lucia (Civil Code, Arts .

368 at seq.) they have been re-enacted in 452 substance . Some of the See also:

British colonies have conferred a statutory right to remove fixtures on tenants (cf . See also:Tasmania, Landlord and Tenant Act 1874) . In certain of the colonies acquired by cession,or See also:settlement (e.g . New See also:Zealand) the English Landlord and Tenant Act 1851 is in force . AuTn0RITIEs.-English law: See also:Amos and Ferard, Law of Fixtures (3rd ed., See also:London, 1883) ; See also:Brown, Law of Fixtures (3rd ed., London, 1875); See also:Ryde, on Rating (2nd ed., London, 1905) . Scots Law: See also:Hunter, Landlord and Tenant; See also:Erskine's Principles (loth ed., Edin., 1903) . See also:American Law: Bronson, Law of Fixtures (St See also:Paul, 1904) ; See also:Reeves, Real Property (See also:Boston, 1904) ; Ruling Cases (London and Boston, 1894-1901), Tit . " Fixtures " (American Notes) . (A . W .

End of Article: FIXTURES (Lat. figere, to fix)
[back]
THEODORE FIX (180o-1846)
[next]
ARMAND HIPPOLYTE LOUIS FIZEAU (1819–1896)

Additional information and Comments

There are no comments yet for this article.
» Add information or comments to this article.
Please link directly to this article:
Highlight the code below, right click and select "copy." Paste it into a website, email, or other HTML document.