Category: Landlord and Tenant

Dutch Oven Ltd v Egham Estate and Investment Co Ltd: ChD 1968

Megarry J was asked which was the relevant hearing when a court considered the condition of a landlord’s intention to redevelop premises to support a refusal of a new tenancy. He approved an application that the landlord’s ground of opposition be tried as a preliminary issue. Only if the landlord failed to establish his ground would the court then need to go on to address matters relating to the terms of any new tenancy. He held that the relevant hearing for the purpose of establishing the landlord’s intention was the hearing to determine the preliminary issue and that if he failed on that occasion, so that a further hearing became necessary to determine the terms of a new tenancy, the landlord could not have a second bite of the cherry and seek to establish that his intention had been made good by the date of the later hearing.

Judges:

Megarry J

Citations:

[1968] 1 WLR 1483

Statutes:

Landlord and Tenant Act 1954

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Somerfield Stores Ltd v Spring (Sutton Coldfield) Ltd ChD 4-Aug-2010
The landlord had opposed the renewal of the claimant’s business tenancies saying that it wished to redevelop the sites. Before the matter came to trial, the landlord went into administration, and the tenant sought summary judgment. It now appealed . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.421532

Overcom Properties v Stockleigh Hall Residents Management Ltd: ChD 1988

The lease granted the defendants rights of access over the grounds and forecourts of a block of flats, but reserving to the lessor the right to develop ‘notwithstanding that the access of light or air or any other easement appertaining to the flat may be obstructed or interfered with’.
Held: Vinelott J said: ‘Looking at the lease as a whole and to the situation of the flat and the entrances, the words ‘obstructed’ or ‘interfered with’ should be read as ‘permitting acts which would otherwise allow for an unjustified obstruction or interference with an easement and which would otherwise be an act or nuisance but not acts which would, for practical purposes, destroy it’.’

Judges:

Vinelott J

Citations:

[1988] 58 PandCR 1

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Paragon Finance plc v City of London Real Property Co Ltd ChD 16-Jul-2001
The claimants were underlessees of an office building. The offices had enjoyed a right of light for over a hundred years, and the freehold had acquired an easement of light by lost modern grant. The roadway having been closed, the defendant head . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.267163

Davies Attbrook (Chemists) Ltd v Benchmark Group plc: ChD 26 Oct 2005

The tenant sought to renew his tenancy. Proceedings were commenced as negotiations continued. They were uncontested. The landlord later and at the last moment sought permission to amend the pleadings to include a request for a break clause, and now appealed a refusal of that permission.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The judge had referred to the tenant’s legitimate expectations. That concept was wrongly imported from public law. The hearing would be adjourned in any event, and the judge had given too much weight to the timing of the application. The personal circumstances of the tenant’s directors was not a relevant consideration when making such a decision.

Judges:

Lewison J

Citations:

Times 24-Nov-2005

Statutes:

Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 825

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Adams v Green 1978
‘It was no part of the policy . . of the 1954 Act to give security of tenure to a business tenant at the expense of preventing redevelopment.’ . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.235383

SB Property Co Ltd v Chelsea Football and Athletic Co Ltd: ChD 6 Nov 1990

Clause 1 of the lease provided that the quarterly rent should be the higher of: (a) the amount payable by the landlord as interest on certain borrowings; and (b) 10% of the Club’s gross receipts as defined. The question arose as to treatment of season ticket payments as accruals: ‘The typical payment which raises a question of time apportionment is the purchase of a season ticket. Everyone buys their season tickets at the beginning of the season. The ticket entitles the holder to admission to matches held during the whole season, covering more than one quarter. Is the whole payment to be brought into the calculation for the quarter in which it is made, or is it apportioned according to the quarters in which the matches take place?
Clause 1(2) provides for the correct sum payable to be certified by an auditor. One would expect him to do so in accordance with normal accounting principles. It is a basic principle of accounting, called ‘the accruals concept’, that the accounting period in which a receipt is recognised should be matched against the period in which the corresponding expenditure is incurred. In other words, a payment in the September quarter to attend a match in the March quarter should be apportioned to the March quarter, when the cost of putting on that match will be incurred. The fact that this lease uses quarterly accounting periods whereas the accruals concept is usually used in relation to annual periods is irrelevant.
This principle is so well established that I would expect it to be applied unless there was clear language to exclude it. Mr Scrivener says that there is. The clause speaks of ‘gross receipts for the use of the demised premises received by the Tenant ( . . ) in such quarter’. That is said to show clearly that what matters is the quarter in which the payment is received. I agree that ‘in such quarter’ would, as a matter of good English, most naturally apply to the immediate antecedent ‘received by the Tenant’, even though they are separated by a long parenthesis. But the words are also capable of referring back to ‘for the use of the demised premises’ and from a commercial point of view, that seems to me the more sensible construction. I therefore hold that receipts must be time apportioned by reference to the quarters in which the matches to which they relate are played.’

Judges:

Hoffmann J

Citations:

Unreported, 6 November 1990

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Distinguished – Altonwood Ltd v Crystal Palace FC (2000) Ltd ChD 7-Mar-2005
The landlord claimed arrears of rent and other payments due under the lease of the football ground occupied by the club. A licence had been granted for the accomodation to be shared with Wimbledon Football Club. The rent varied with the gate . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.223842

London Fire and Civil Defence Authority v Ahktar: CA 14 Feb 2001

The claimant landlord sought possession after long years of non-payment of rent. The secure tenant said that the landlord had entirely failed in its repairing obligations, and that the sums of rent had been expended on those repairs.

Judges:

Thorpe LJ

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 295

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1985

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Landlord and Tenant, Housing

Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.217999

Khokher v Arundel Corporation: CA 11 Jul 2002

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 1221

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Arundel Corporation (an Overseas Company) v Mohammed Ramzan Khokher CA 9-Apr-2003
In the course of an application under the Landlord and Tenant Act, the landlord sought to adduce on appeal evidence that the tenant and his solicitors had sought to deceive the court.
Held: The application should not be heard in private since . .
See Also – Arundel Corporation v Khokher CA 9-Dec-2003
The tenant had served a notice to review the rent. The tenent delivered a counter notice personally be posting it through the letter box. The lease provided that the notice was to be served at the last known business address of the landlord. The . .

Cited by:

See Also – Arundel Corporation (an Overseas Company) v Mohammed Ramzan Khokher CA 9-Apr-2003
In the course of an application under the Landlord and Tenant Act, the landlord sought to adduce on appeal evidence that the tenant and his solicitors had sought to deceive the court.
Held: The application should not be heard in private since . .
See Also – Arundel Corporation v Khokher CA 9-Dec-2003
The tenant had served a notice to review the rent. The tenent delivered a counter notice personally be posting it through the letter box. The lease provided that the notice was to be served at the last known business address of the landlord. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 23 June 2022; Ref: scu.217431

Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea v Khan and Another: CA 16 Jan 2002

Judges:

Judge, Latham, Arden LJJ

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 279

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1957 9(1A)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Swansea City Council v Glass CA 1992
The defendant had failed himself to repair his property, and the Local Authority carried out the work itself under the 1957 Act. It sought to recover the associated costs from the defendant, but he said that their claim was time barred, being more . .
Appeal from – Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea v Khan and Wellcome Trust ChD 8-Jun-2001
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Limitation, Landlord and Tenant, Housing

Updated: 23 June 2022; Ref: scu.216738

Hemingway Securities Ltd v Dunraven Ltd and another: ChD 16 Aug 1994

The lease contained a covenant against sub-letting. The tenant created a sub-lease in breach of that covenant and without the consent of the landlord.
Held: The head landlord was entitled to an injunction requiring the sub-tenant to surrender he sub-lease to the landlord’s tenant. The sub-tenant was fixed with notice of the covenant in the head lease, which was to be treated as a restrictive covenant. Equally the subtenant had committed the tort of inducing the tenant to break its contract with the landlord.

Judges:

Jacob J

Citations:

[1995] 1 EGLR 61, (1995) 09 EG 322, [1994] EWHC Ch 1, (1996) 71 P and CR 30

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Applied – Tulk v Moxhay 22-Dec-1848
Purchaser with notice bound in Equity
A, being seised of the centre garden and some houses in Leicester Square, conveyed the garden to B in fee, and B covenanted for himself and his assigns to keep the garden unbuilt upon.
Held: A purchaser from B, with notice of the covenant, was . .
Applied – Esso Petroleum v Kingswood Motors (Addlestone) Ltd and Others 1974
The defendant entered into a five year solus tie agreement with the plaintiff which required the defendant before completing any sale or transfer of the garage or its business to notify Esso and procure such person to enter into a direct agreement . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 23 June 2022; Ref: scu.216554

Wheeler v Mercer: HL 31 Oct 1956

The freeholder sought possession of his premises occupied by the defendant over many years. The tenant said that he had the protection of the 1954 Act as a tenant at will. The landlord said that the occupation was not protected. The formal tenancy had been terminated before the 1954 Act came in, but the tenant had stayed in occupation after losing the right to have a new tenancy as the new Act came in.
Held: A tenancy at will, whether created in writing or orally did not achieve protection under the 1954 Act. Section 69 defined a tenancy in such a way as to exclude a tenancy at will.

Judges:

Viscount Simonds, Lord Morton of Henryton, Lord Cohen, Lord Keith of Avonholm, Lord Somervell of Harrow

Citations:

[1957] AC 416, [1956] UKHL 5, [1956] 3 All ER 631

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Landlord and Tenant Act 1954

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Martinali v Ramuz CA 1953
Under Section 10 of the 1951 Act an occupier might apply for obtain a new tenancy. The expiring tenancy had end immediately before the Act came into force or within two years of that date, ‘and would so come to an end by effluxion of time or by the . .
Cited – Morgan v William Harrison Limited 1907
In some cases the relation of tenant at will may be expressly created by contract. . .

Cited by:

Applied – Cricket Ltd v Shaftesbury plc ChD 16-Dec-1998
The tenant had had two six month tenancies followed by a tenancy at will. He sought protection under the 1954 Act, saying that the total term exceeded 12 months.
Held: A period which did not itself qualify under the Act could not be aggregated . .
Cited – Javad v Aqil CA 15-May-1990
P in possession – tenancy at will Until Completion
A prospective tenant was allowed into possession and then made periodic payments of rent while negotiations proceeded on the terms of a lease to be granted to him. The negotiations broke down.
Held: The tenant’s appeal failed. It was inferred . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 23 June 2022; Ref: scu.216562

Co-Operative Group Food Ltd v A and A Shah Properties Limited and Another: ChD 12 Apr 2019

Whether or not guarantee provisions in a licence to assign certain leased premises are enforceable or whether they are struck down by the provisions of the Landlord and Tenant (Covenants) Act 1995

Judges:

Mann J

Citations:

[2019] EWHC 941 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Landlord and Tenant (Covenants) Act 1995

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 23 June 2022; Ref: scu.636131

Parsons (Acting In Person) v Fairfield Rents Ltd (Eastern): FTTPC 15 Dec 2014

Application for an order that all or any of the costs incurred by the landlord in connection with proceedings under Case Reference CAM/33UF/LSC/2014/0.
Held: The Tribunal declines to make the order in relation to section 20C of the LTA 1985 due to want of jurisdiction.

Citations:

[2014] UKFTT RP – CAM – 33UF –

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 23 June 2022; Ref: scu.630485

William Smith (Wakefield) Ltd v Parisride Ltd: Admn 23 Mar 2005

The tenant farmer served two notices both referring the landlord’s notice to quit to arbitration (s28(4)) and also a counter-notice (s28(2)). The landlord said he could not serve both and had not identified which he wished to proceed upon. No referral in fact took place.
Held: The legislation contemplated only one decision about the tenancy, but the provisions could not be read to limit the tenant to only one way forward. They had simply not foreseen the tenant’s choice. Neither by itself began proceedings, that was for the landlord. Two sets of proceedings should not be allowed to go ahead, and a tenant’s preference for arbitration would be given sway, but the choice given to the landlord was not burdensome.

Judges:

Leveson J

Citations:

Times 08-Apr-2005, [2005] EWHC 462 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Agricultural Holdings Act 1986 28(2), Agriculture (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1954 6(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Clegg v Fraser 1982
The court considered at what level a point of law would justify reference from an arbitration to the High Court. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Agriculture, Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 23 June 2022; Ref: scu.223857

Cresswell v Duke of Westminster: CA 1985

‘Where we draw the line I do not know, I doubt whether it is in anybody’s interest that I should attempt to draw that line. Many cases will answer the question on their own facts.’

Judges:

Sir John Donaldson MR

Citations:

[1985] 2 EGLR 151

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Cadogan Estates Limited v Morris CA 4-Nov-1998
The tenant had served a notice to purchase the freehold of the premises at pounds 100.00, a formal nominal figure. The landlord claimed that the notice was invalid.
Held: The process was one of compulsory purchase. ‘The tenant is required to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 23 June 2022; Ref: scu.223954

Parkus v Greenwood: CA 2 Jan 1950

The tenant appealed a finding that his lease did not contain a clause making it a perpetually renewable lease.
Held: The appeal succeeded. There was in fact an express covenant or obligation for perpetual renewal.

Citations:

[1950] Ch 644

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Parkus v Greenwood ChD 1950
In the lease, the landlord agreed to grant a further lease: ‘for a further term of three years from the expiration of the said term at the same rent and containing the like agreements and provisions as are herein contained, including the present . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 23 June 2022; Ref: scu.259709

Jessamine Investment Co v Schwartz: CA 1978

The tenants Mr and Mrs Levy did not know their landlord Mrs David’s address and had no means of paying the rent.
Held: They had acquired the title by adverse possession against their mesne landlord (Mrs David) – but that nevertheless their statutory tenancy had continued against the freeholder.
Sir John Pennycuick said that: ‘I should be very reluctant to introduce a substantive distinction in the application of a provision of the Limitation Act to registered and unregistered land respectively, based upon what is plainly a conveyancing device designed to adapt that provision to the former class of land.’
Stephenson LJ said: ‘Decisions of this court prevent us from deciding that Mrs Schwartz was not, from the receipt of the last payment of rent by Mrs David, ‘a person in whose favour the period of limitation can run,’ and so not ‘in adverse possession’ within section 10 (1) of the Act of 1939 . . ‘

Judges:

Sir John Pennycuick, Stephenson LJ

Citations:

[1978] QB 264

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Landlord and Tenant, Limitation

Updated: 23 June 2022; Ref: scu.252434

Neale v Del Soto: CA 1945

A letting of two of a number of rooms in a property together with joint use with the landlord of the kitchen, bathroom, lavatory and conservatory was not a letting of the two rooms as a separate dwelling, but a sharing of the property. The letting was not secure.

Citations:

[1945] KB 144, [1945] 1 All ER 191

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Uratemp Ventures Limited v Collins HL 11-Oct-2001
Can a single room within a hotel comprise a separate dwelling within the 1988 Act and be subject to an assured tenancy?
Held: A single room can be a dwelling. Each case must be interpreted in its own light as a question of fact, but respecting . .
Cited – A G Securities v Vaughan; Antoniades v Villiers and Bridger HL 10-Nov-1988
In Antoniades, the two tenants occupied an attic, living together. Each had at the same time signed identical agreements purporting to create licences. The landlord had reserved to himself the right to occupy the property and to allow others to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant, Housing

Updated: 23 June 2022; Ref: scu.221446

Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce v Bello and Others: CA 22 Jan 1992

Occupation of property taken up ‘until works paid for’ was sufficiently certain to create a tenancy, despite the absence of a certain term. It would be clear when it was to come to an end. Accordingly the tenant had locus as against the mortgagee in possession proceedings.

Citations:

Gazette 22-Jan-1992

Statutes:

Land Registration Act 1925 70(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 23 June 2022; Ref: scu.78868

Cardshops Limited v Davies and Another: CA 1971

When considering the terms of a new lease to be ordered under the Act, the terms of the current tenancy are not necessarily decisive. There may be other circumstances but it is a guide. The terms of the current tenancy are to be considered first in every case. There was no evidence of any special facts affecting the property not common to all retail premises in high-class business areas. The parties are not at liberty to insist on changes simply because they may be beneficial. Every tenant would volunteer to accept increased liabilities as to this or that matter for the purpose of getting, on terms that he thought might ultimately profit him, a lower rent; every landlord might press this or that concession on the tenant because it would enable him to say the open market rent was a higher rent. The right course is to take the terms of the existing lease are a sufficient guide. No special reason is shown for a change and the tenant objects.

Judges:

Widgery, Denning LJJ

Citations:

[1971] 1 WLR 591

Statutes:

Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 35

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Northern Electric Plc v Addison CA 12-Jun-1997
The appellant challenged the terms of an order granting it a new lease under the Act. The landlord sought to have included an upwards only rent review. There was a ransom element since the plot was used as a base for an electricity sub-station which . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 23 June 2022; Ref: scu.180631

Avonridge Property Co Ltd v Mashru and others: CA 14 Oct 2004

The lease released the landlord from his liability to repair after his assignment of the reversion. It appealed a finding that the provision was void under the 1995 Act, saying the clause was a personal covenant not caught by the Act.
Held: The covenant could not successfully proclaim itself both personal and binding on a successor in title: ‘the distinction between a personal covenant and a ‘landlord’s covenant’ within the meaning of section 6 of the 1995 Act is that a ‘landlord’s covenant’ is one which is binding on the landlord’s successors in title, whereas, by definition, a covenant which is personal to the landlord does not bind his successors’. The appeal failed.

Judges:

Lord Justice Pill Lord Justice Parker The Honourable Mr Justice Hooper

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Civ 1306, [2005] 1 WLR 236

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Landlord and Tenant (Covenants) Act 1995

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – BHP Petroleum Great Britain Ltd v Chesterfield Properties Ltd and another CA 30-Nov-2001
The claimant granted a lease to the respondents, and then assigned the reversion to another company. It gave notice to the tenant of its desire to be released from its obligations as landlord. The tenant did not serve any counter-notice. Defects . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – London Diocesan Fund and others v Avonridge Property Company Ltd and Phithwa HL 1-Dec-2005
The defendant had taken on a lease of a parade of shops, and sub-let each shop for a full premium at a nominal rent. It sought to limit its own liability to pay the head rent by limiting the covenant in the sub-leases to pay the head rent to the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.216418

Herbert Berry Associates Ltd v Inland Revenue Commissioners; re Herbert BerrySP, Regina (on The Application of) v The Lord Chancellor: HL 1977

The principle to the effect that the court should exercise its discretion to restrain a distress levied by a landlord before the commencement of a winding-up only where there were special circumstances rendering it inequitable that he should be permitted to do so, applies also to a distress levied by the Crown under a statutory duty.
Lord Russell said: ‘Finally section 325 cannot avail the liquidator: . . It was suggested that distraint was a form of execution; but Parliament has quite clearly distinguished distress and execution: see section 228 of the 1948 Act’ and ‘So far as concerns section 325 I cannot conceive a more deliberate restriction to two only of methods of proceeding – I use the word in a non-technical sense – against the property of a company.’ S61 TMA 1970 and s319 CA 1948 could quite easily sit together. Section 61 imposes on the collector a statutory duty to distrain. Under section 319(7), a distraint (even if completed by sale) within 3 months of the winding-up order charges the distrained goods or their proceeds of sale with the preferential debts. Subject to that, and the discretion of the court to restrain completion of an uncompleted distress, the distrainor keeps the good distrained. Accordingly, in a voluntary winding-up, the distraint, even if incomplete, was permitted to disturb the pari passu distribution of preferential debts. The distrained assets are not assets of the company available for distribution within sections 302 or 319(5). There was a need for a lis to support an application for an asset freezing injunction. ‘The primary sense of action as a term of legal act is the invocation of the jurisdiction of the court by writ.’

Judges:

Lord Simon of Glaisdale, Lord Russell

Citations:

[1977] 1 WLR 1437, [1977] 1 All ER 161, [1977] UKHL TC – 52 – 113, [1980] AC 562, 53 TC 241, [1979] STC 735, [1979] TR 335, 121 SJ 829

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Companies Act 1948 325, Taxes Management Act 1970 61

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

At ChD – Herbert Berry Associates Ltd v Inland Revenue Commissioners ChD 1976
The collector of taxes distrained on the goods of the company under section 61 TMA 1970 for unpaid taxes and the company entered into a walking possession agreement. Before the collector had sold the goods, and completed the distress, the company . .
At CA – Herbert Berry Associates Ltd v Inland Revenue Commissioners CA 2-Jan-1976
The word ‘proceedings’ meant the ‘invocation of the jurisdiction of a court by process other than writ’. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Fourie v Le Roux and Others ChD 30-Sep-2004
Interim asset freezing injunctions had been obtained on the application of a liquidator in South Africa. The defendant applied for their discharge.
Held: They should be discharged. No foreign proceedings had been specified for which they were . .
Cited – Brenner v Revenue and Customs; In re Modern Jet Support Centre Ltd ChD 21-Jul-2005
The court was asked whether the process of distraint against goods for unpaid tax under section 61 of the 1970 Act is an ‘execution’ within section 183 of the 1986 Act which applies where a creditor has issued, but not completed, execution against . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Insolvency, Landlord and Tenant, Taxes Management

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.216341

British Gas Corporation v Universities Superannuation Scheme: ChD 1986

The lease had a five yearly rent review, to be the highest of the current rent the rack rental value at the relevant rate. The rack rent was calculated under a hypothetical lease containing the same provisions (save for rent). The tenant sought a declaration that this was to exclude only the rental value, not other provisions as to rent.
Held: The lease was to be construed according to its underlying commercial purpose, and the review should assume a lease containing the same review provisions. As to the general purpose of a rent review clause: ‘There is really no dispute that the general purpose of a provision for rent review is to enable the landlord to obtain from time to time the market rental which the premises would command if let on the same terms on the open market at the review dates. The purpose is to reflect the changes in the value of money and real increases in the value of the property during a long term.’

Judges:

Browne Wilkinson VC

Citations:

[1986] 1 All ER 978, [1986] 1 WLR 398

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Arnold and Others v National Westminster Bank Plc CA 14-Mar-1994
There was no power to remit a case to an arbitrator after a later court decision decision which showed that the law applied by the arbitrator was wrong. The arbitrator’s award was on the basis that a new lease should contain a rent review, but the . .
Applied – Laura Investments v Havering ChD 1992
The land was undeveloped when let to the tenant, who covenanted to build on it. On the rent review, the landlord contended that the rent should be calculated on the developed value, rather than in the condition as originally let.
Held: In the . .
Cited – Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council v Host Group Limited CA 1988
A lease of various buildings including a public house required the rent review to be carried out on the premise that the demise consisted of a bare site. The issue was whether the terms of the hypothetical letting and the valuation formula were to . .
Cited – Hemingway Realty Ltd v Clothworkers’ Company ChD 8-Mar-2005
The lease provided for a rent review under which the rent might either be increased or decreased. The landlord had chosen not to exercise the clause in view of falling rents. The tenant purported to do so. The landlord said that it alone had the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Arbitration, Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.180567

Yenula Properties Ltd v Naidu: ChD 18 Jul 2002

The landlord appealed a finding of the county court that a notice of assured shorthold tenancy needed to be served on the tenant personally. Here the notice had been served on the proposed tenant’s solicitors.
Held: Though Galinski applied to a different procedure the analogy was appropriate. Service on the tenant’s solicitors was adequate. Proceedings had been commenced anticipating no dispute as to fact. Once it became clear that there was such a dispute, the court should have expressly stated that it was to be treated as if it had never been allocated to fast track, and that it should accordingly proceed as a multi-track case, and an appeal would be to the High Court and not to the Court of Appeal.

Judges:

Lloyd J

Citations:

Times 29-Aug-2002

Statutes:

Housing Act 1988 20, Civil Procedure Rules Part 8, Access to Justice Act 1999 (Destination of Appeals) Order 2000 (2000 No 1071) 4

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Galinski v McHugh 5-Oct-1988
A landlord’s notice under section 4 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 had been served on the tenant’s solicitors, who had confirmed that they had authority to accept service. Later the tenant challenged the validity of the service.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant, Housing, Civil Procedure Rules

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.174753

Hackney v Side By Side (Kids) Ltd: QBD 14 Jul 2003

The defendant sought a stay of a warrant for possession. It had submitted to an order for possession by consent in return for a promise of alternative accomodation. They sought a stay under section 89, saying that the claimant had not complied with its own obligations.
Held: The general words of section 89 do not permit the high court to find that section 89 does not apply to consent orders. The possession order could not be postponed.

Judges:

Mr Justice Stanley Burnton

Citations:

[2003] EWHC 1813 (QB), Times 05-Aug-2003, [2004] 1 WLR 363, [2004] 2 All ER 373

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1980 89(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

per incuriam – Bain and Co v Church Commissioners for England ChD 1989
Section 89 does not apply to an order for possession made by the High Court, and an application for an adjournment of a possession order must be refused. The word ‘Court’ must be construed to refer to the County Court only: ‘possession of a dwelling . .
Cited – Re International Tin Council ChD 1987
An order for the winding up of a foreign company operates universally, applies to all the foreign company’s assets and brings into play the full panoply of powers and duties under the Insolvency Act 1986 like any other winding up order. Millett J . .
Cited – Re International Tin Council CA 1989
Creditors sought to treat the International Tin Council as an ‘association’ for the purposes of a provision under the Companies Act 1985 allowing for unregistered companies to be wound up.
Held: The decision in Re a Company was binding. The . .

Cited by:

Cited – Boyland and Son Ltd v Rand CA 20-Dec-2006
The defendant travellers occupied land belonging to the claimants. A possession order had been obtained, and the defendants now sought a reasonable time to be allowed to leave.
Held: The law had not changed, and section 89 could not be used to . .
Applied – Admiral Taverns (Cygnet Ltd) v Daly and Another CA 25-Nov-2008
The landlord appealed against a stay made on its suspended possession order by the High Court, saying that only the county court had such jurisdiction.
Held: ‘court’ in the section must mean any court. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 19 June 2022; Ref: scu.185058

Micrografix v Woking 8 Ltd: ChD 1995

The tenants gave a notice determining the lease on 23 March 1995 when under the relevant clause they could only have done so on 23 June 1995. Jacob J. held that, as the landlords knew that the date of determination could only be 23 June 1995, they would not have been misled, and the notice should therefore be treated as an effective notice to determine the lease on the correct date, viz. 23 June 1995. A notice to determine under a commercial lease is to be interpreted not as a ‘technical document’ but in accordance with business common sense.

Judges:

Jacobs J

Citations:

[1995] 2 EGLR

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Preferred – Carradine Properties Ltd v Aslam ChD 1976
Under a break clause in a lease, the relevant date upon which a notice given by either party under the clause might take effect was a date in September 1975, but the landlord’s notice in September 1974 specified a date in 1973. The date in 1973, had . .
Distinguished – Hankey v Clavering CA 1942
A lease term ran for 21 years from 25 December 1934. A break clause gave either party the right to determine the lease at the expiration of the first seven years, by six calendar months’ notice. The landlord gave notice to the tenant’s solicitors in . .

Cited by:

Doubted – Mannai Investment Co Ltd v Eagle Star Assurance HL 21-May-1997
Minor Irregularity in Break Notice Not Fatal
Leases contained clauses allowing the tenant to break the lease by serving not less than six months notice to expire on the third anniversary of the commencement date of the term of the lease. The tenant gave notice to determine the leases on 12th . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 18 June 2022; Ref: scu.185084

Guys’n’Dolls v Sade Bros: CA 1984

Citations:

[1984] 1 EGLR 103

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – JBW Group Ltd v Westminster City Council CA 12-Mar-2010
The tenant had applied to the landlord for consent to assign certain leases. The court had declared the right to exercise break clauses in certain leases as lost. The court had found the right to be lost after the assignment of the leases by the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 18 June 2022; Ref: scu.426718

Marcroft Wagons Ltd v Smith: CA 1951

Denning LJ discussed the situation of a tenant holding over after his lease had expired: ‘If the acceptance of rent can be explained on some other footing than that a contractual tenancy existed, as, for instance, by reason of an existing or possible statutory right to remain, then a new tenancy should not be inferred.’

Judges:

Denning LJ

Citations:

[1951] 2 KB 496

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Javad v Aqil CA 15-May-1990
P in possession – tenancy at will Until Completion
A prospective tenant was allowed into possession and then made periodic payments of rent while negotiations proceeded on the terms of a lease to be granted to him. The negotiations broke down.
Held: The tenant’s appeal failed. It was inferred . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 18 June 2022; Ref: scu.352249

Cole v Kelly: CA 1920

In the absence of a contrary intention a concurrent lease passes to the concurrent lessee the concurrent lessor’s accrued rights under the existing lease. The landlord has granted to the second lessee a pro tanto disposition of the reversionary estate.
Asprey J explained a holding over: ‘A holding over occurs where, after the expiration of the term originally granted, the tenant continues in possession with the consent of the landlord but without prior agreement as to the terms upon which the possession of the subject property is to be retained, which situation gives rise to a tenancy at will which tenancy by a subsequent payment of rent or by subsequent agreement may be converted into a tenancy of more fixed duration, e.g. weekly, monthly, etc.’
Atkin LJ said that where, after the termination of any tenancy, the tenant holds over, and ‘the facts do not exclude an implied agreement to hold upon the terms of the old lease,’ then impliedly the old terms remain.

Judges:

Asprey J, Bankes LJ, Atkin LJ

Citations:

[1920] 2 KB 10

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Bennett Properties v H and S Engineering QBD 14-Oct-1998
The parties had been landlord and tenant and the lease was to be renewed for a second time. They negotiated and ageed terms for the next lease, including particularly a new rent, but the tenant did not execute the new lease. The landlord had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 18 June 2022; Ref: scu.352247