In a writ of waste brought against a tenant for a life term who pleaded an order of the plaintiff and that he ordered him to dig for gravel. On which there was a demurrer for judgment as to whether or not the order was good.
Keble. It seems that it is not good and this order was void in law for there is no good order except that he who gave it had power over the thing and here the lessor had no power over the land during the life of the tenant for life. For the tenant for the term of his life can have an action of trespass against the lessor for digging his land and that proves that he has no power to order something in relation to something in which he has no interest and thus the order is void. For if I order a man to take the goods of J.A. and afterwards J.A. makes me his executor I will have an action against him as executor and this order will not help him because I had no power to give the order. And so if I order a man to kill my father I will have an appeal against him. And if I bring a formedon against a man and deliver to him a writ of estrepment and I order him to cut trees I say that this order will be of no avail to him afterwards.
And BRYAN, C.J. said that it was equally dubious.
Wood (to the same effect). And said that this action is given by the statute of Westminster II and this order by words alone could not bar the statute and said that if a man has an apprentice a discharge or licence in words alone is not valid.
Jay and Rede argued to the contrary.
Haugh of the same opinion.
TOWNSHEND, J. to the contrary: for it is gravel and land is part of the inheritance of the lessor as much as the reversion, for digging the land is disinheritance of him and it is part of his inheritance; so he cannot grant this by bare words for inheritance cannot pass by bare words and if he wishes to grant his reversion by words it will not pass; no more is his order good without a deed.
BRYAN, C.J. To the same effect and said that it is necessary to show a specialty to extinguish some thing when a man has confessed his duty on one occasion and afterwards wants to avoid it; otherwise not; for if the deed makes the duty conditional then there is no need of any writing as if I make an agreement to construct a building by indenture I will say that I have done that. And there is a difference between gravel and trees for the lessor cannot take land as it is not his but the trees are his and so he can order them to be cut; but not to dig any land whether in writing or without it.
Citations:
[1487] [Co Litt 53b (p)]
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Dayani v London Borough of Bromley TCC 25-Nov-1999
LA Tenant liable for permissive waste
The local authority was tenant of properties which it sub-licensed to homeless persons for three years was liable for having allowed the properties to deteriorate. It was claimed that they were liable for permissive waste as tenants for a fixed . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Landlord and Tenant
Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.196989