000			01214cam a2200217 4500
001			ABS63728
008			000000n2001 000 0 eng u
035			_a(Sirsi) u111748
100			_aWilkinson, H. W.
245			_aAhoy, 'Dinty Moore', your time is up
260			_c2001
490			_aNLJ Practitioner _v151(6976) 23 March 2001, 419-420(2)
520			_aOffers an in-depth discussion of the issues raised in "Chelsea Yacht and Boat Company Ltd v Pope" and the implications of the CA's ruling. This involved the issue of whether the letting of a houseboat constituted a tenancy of a dwelling-house, according to the Housing Act 1988 Part 1. The CA judge considered two issues: whether the houseboat was a chattel and thus incapable of being the subject of a tenancy, and argued that the houseboat was not a dwelling-house. Permanence and the purpose of annexation were important factors in this case. Gives details of other cases in which the issue of annexation arose, if in different contexts.
590			_aABS
650			_aCHELSEA YACHT AND BOAT CO LTD V POPE
650			_aHOUSEBOATS
650			_aCHATTELS
650			_aANNEXATION
690			_aLANDLORD AND TENANT-CASE LAW
942			_n0
999			_c66581 _d66581