Hire Purchase

ASSIGNMENT LAW245: MALAYSIAN LEGAL SYSTEM QUESTION ONE a) Houses built on stilts In the case of Holland v. Hodgson, the court held that all thing attached to the land are fixtures, thus it shall from part of the land. On the other hand, by virtue of National Land Code 1965, section 5 classified land as either land above the shore line or foreshore and seabed. But our land Land Court does not defined items which fall under fixtures or chattel. Therefore, we should test the condition by : 1) Degree of Annexation i) To what extend is an item attached to the land. The item might be strongly or slightly attached to the land or the item might be resting by its own on the land. In this case, the stilts house firmly attached to the land via its stilts. Then for the first test, it seems it a fixture. ii) To what extend an injury will be caused to the item upon its removal. If to remove the item that fix to the land will cause damaged to the item or building then it is considered as fixture but if the item did not cause any damage when it removed, the thing is considered as a chattel. 2) Purpose of Annexation It is important to consider the purpose of annexation in order to determine whether the item falls under definition of fixture or chattel. These are 2 things to be considered: i) The thing attach to the land for the enhancement of the value of the land is considered as fixture. ii) The thing attach to land for better use of the item is a chattel. In this case, the stilts house attached to the land for the value of the land itself. So for the second test it seems as a fixture. But, there are exceptions where even though the item attached to the land, they can be considered as a chattel. The exceptions are: 1) Tenant’s fixture It occurs when i) Tenant brings in his item and attaches it to the rented place for purpose of business such as oven installed in restaurant. ii) Tenants