Property Essay

734 WordsNov 2, 20143 Pages
Bagrave v Scott(1984) • The plaintiff entered a contract with a Builder for renovations who in turn entered a Contract with the Defendants for Installation of air conditioning plant which was on shock absorbing pads. • We put emphasis on the word of “intent”. • The relation and situation of the party making the annosiation visiting the owner. • The mode of annosation and the purpose for which the alleged cattle was fixted. National Australia Bank v Blacker • Irrogation of Equipment. • Chattel Litz v National Australia Bank (1986) • Irrogation of Equipment Bagrave v Scott(1984) • The plaintiff entered a contract with a Builder for renovations who in turn entered a Contract with the Defendants for Installation of air conditioning plant which was on shock absorbing pads. • We put emphasis on the word of “intent”. • The relation and situation of the party making the annosiation visiting the owner. • The mode of annosation and the purpose for which the alleged cattle was fixted. National Australia Bank v Blacker • Irrogation of Equipment. • Chattel Litz v National Australia Bank (1986) • Irrogation of Equipment • Fixture • Polombori v Polombori (1986) • The carpet was a fixture. In boton V PS Bank • The carpet was a shuttle. Neuton v Brown (1872) Harold v LPJ Investivemnet • Injunction is the primary facie remedy • There is not one test that is decisive. • No attempt to negotiate a payment. Concurrent Ownership: • Successive interest s 75, s 79. • Co-ownership exists where 2 or more person stimouslesly and not in succession hold an interest in the same parcel of land. • If you have one or more people on a land at one time you can call them co-owner • Joint tenants • Tenants in common. JOINT TENANTCY: • The right of survivorship – • Upon the death of one joint tenant, that

More about Property Essay

Open Document