Cases - Barvis v Secretary of State for the Environment
Record details
- Name
- Barvis v Secretary of State for the Environment
- Date
- (1971)
- Citation
- 22 P&CR 417
- Legislation
- Keywords
- Planning control - Town and Country Planning Act 1990
- Summary
-
B erected a mobile tower crane at a depot. It was 89 feet high and ran on a steel track fixed in concrete. B claimed that it was not part of the 'realty' as it was intended that the crane be moved on and off the land when required.
Mr Justice Bridge thought it was wrong to substitute issues of real property law and cases on fixtures for the statutory definition in the 1990 Act. Instead he found assistance from a case on the meaning of building or structure for the purposes of rating (Cardiff Rating Authority v Guest Keen Baldwin's Iron and Steel Co (1949)). The judge in that case picked out 3 factors which, while not conclusive, would indicate that something was in the nature of a building or structure. These are:
- substantial size - such that it has or would normally be constructed on the land and not ready made;
- some degree of permanence - so it would normally remain in place and only be removed by pulling down or taking to pieces; and
- physical attachment, although the fact that something is not so attached is not conclusive.
The judge also observed that a limited degree of motion does not necessarily prevent something from being in the nature of a structure.
'If, as a matter of impression, one looks objectively at this enormous crane, it seems to me impossible to say that it did not amount to a structure or erection.'