What is the legal test for affixing a piece of equipment that was not attached to the land but rested on its own weight?

Dealing generally with the articles in question, the evidence satisfies me that the object of setting-up the articles was to improve the usefulness of the property and showed an intention not of occasional but of permanent affixing. I will now deal with the articles separately: (1) The barn: This consisted of two sides, one end and a roof and was placed against and spiked to another barn. It rested on sills on the ground. (2) Three pumps: These were set in the wells in square holes. (3) 60-barrel water tank: The tank was not fixed to the ground but rested on its own weight, but attached to the tank was a conductor pipe which connected the eaves-trough with the tank. Articles no further attached to the land than by their own weight may become fixtures if the circumstances are such as to show that they were intended to be part of the land. [Holland v. Hodgson, L.R. 7 C.P. 328, 41 L.J.C.P. 146.]