Chelsea Yacht And Boat Club V Pope

Chelsea yacht & boat co ltd v pope [2000] 1 wlr 1941. court of appeal a houseboat was moored to a pontoon and to the bank of the thames. it was connected to mains services but it could be quite easily untied and the services disconnected .. The tenant sought to assert that he occupied a houseboat, the dinty moore, under a tenancy of a dwellinghouse under the 1988 act. the claimant appealed a decision that it was. held: a house-boat, even though used as a dwelling, did not have . .. Talk:chelsea yacht and boat club v pope. jump to navigation jump to search. wikiproject law (rated c-class, low-importance) this article is within the scope of wikiproject law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised.

Brentbio240: more muscles

This question arises on appeal from his honour judge cotran in the west london county court who decided that the agreement under which the respondent, mr pope, occupies a houseboat on the thames was such a tenancy.3. the appellants, chelsea yacht & boat company limited, now own the houseboat.. Cited – chelsea yacht and boat club ltd v pope ca (times 07-jun-00, [2000] 22 eg 147, [2000] 1 wlr 1941, bailii, [2000] ewca civ 425) the tenant sought to assert that he occupied a houseboat, the dinty moore, under a tenancy of a dwellinghouse under the 1988 act.. Chelsea yacht and boat club v pope. for a chattel to become part of the land sufficient attachment is required. anchors and moorings were insufficient. they were seen as just there to stop it being carried away. the boat could and would have had to move as per the agreement..

chelsea yacht and boat club v pope