Determine Whether Pamela Has Priority Over The Property In Dunroamin

Interests in Property The goal of this paper is to establish whether Pamela has priority over the two mortgagees on the proceeds of the sale of the property in Dunroamin. It is also to establish if Pamela and Jack have a right over the items removed from the property they had purchased from Ahmed that were present during the purchase of the house. Finally, the paper is to determine whether Pamela can claim a right over the metal object that she picked at the garage. This paper will make use of case law, statutes and legal writings to establish discussions that will determine the rightful interest-holder of the property above. In assessing whether Pamela has a priority over the two mortgagees, it is appropriate to first establish whether she has an interest over the property. Acquisition of interest in land exists in various forms. They include purchase of the land, inheritance, interest through a trust and adverse possession. The interest in land does not have to be registered since it can exist as an overriding interest. In this issue, the writer will examine whether Pamela had an interest in the property in Dunroamin and whether the interest was legal or equitable. S1(1) of the 1925 Law of Property Act recognises freeholds and leaseholds as valid legal rights to property.
In assessing the right, the court will determine whether the items are fixtures or chattels. The degree of annexation distinguishes fixtures and chattels. Blackburn J established the test in Holland v Hodgson when he stated that a fixture is firmly attached to the land. The function of the fixture also serves as a determinant factor. The court dealt with the issue in the case of Botham v TSB Bank PLC. In this case the court held that light fittings had lost their identity as chattels since they were fitted on ceilings that were considered