The Bronze Statutes And The Victorian Wardrobe Essay
1554 WordsNov 6, 20167 Pages
Whether Jack is entitled to those items depend on the distinction of theses items, whereas Laurence is concerning issue with land purchase which involves concepts of proprietary estoppel and constructive trust. The arguments will be concerned in turn below and advices for each issue will be given. Additionally, likely disputes and counter- arguments will be mentioned and comparative conclusion will be reached in the end of this essay .
The issue in Jack’s case is whether or not he is entitled to the bronze statutes and the Victorian wardrobe. Under section 62(1) of the Law of Property Act 1925, a conveyance of land includes “…all buildings, erections, fixtures, commons, hedges, ditches, fences, ways, waters, water-courses, liberties, privileges, easements, rights, and advantages whatsoever, appertaining or reputed to appertain to the land, or any part thereof, or, at the time of conveyance, demised, occupied, or enjoyed with, or reputed or known as part or parcel of or appurtenant to the land or any part thereof.”. This means, everything described in section 62 will be passed to the buyer once the land is sold. So, the issue with Jack is now, clearly the question of whether the bronze statutes and the Victorian wardrobe are or not , according to three-fold distinction draw from Elitestone Limited v Morris  73 P. & C.R. 259, chatters or fixtures or part and parcel of the land. If the bronze statutes and the Victorian wardrobe are fixtures or part or parcel of the