Category: Landlord and Tenant

Roadrunner Properties Ltd v Dean and Another: CA 21 Nov 2003

Where an application is made under the 1996 Act, as to the issue of causation of damage, a court can properly take a reasonably robust approach where the damage to the adjoining owner’s property is of the sort one would expect to result from the building owner’s work.

Judges:

Chadwick LJ

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 1816, [2004] 1 EGLR 73

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Parety Wall etc Act 1996

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

See Also – Roadrunner Properties Ltd and Another v Dean and Another CA 17-Mar-2004
Application to amend order drawn up and agreed . .
Cited – Drake v Harbour CA 31-Jan-2008
The plaintiff engaged the defendants to re-wire her house. She was away, and the defendants in sole charge of the house when it suffered a major fire originating in a room used by the defendants. The defendants appealed a finding of liability saying . .
Cited – Rodrigues v Sokal TCC 30-Jul-2008
The parties owned either half of a semi-detached residence. The defendant had undertaken substantial redevelopment works, and the claimant sought damages under the 1996 Act for his failures to follow that Act. The issues had been taken to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence, Construction, Landlord and Tenant, Land

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.189039

M25 Group Limited v Tudor and others: CA 4 Dec 2003

Tenants served notices under the Act requiring information about the disposal of the freehold. The landlords objected that the notices were invalid in failing to give the tenants’ addresses as required under the Act.
Held: The addresses were known or readily available to the landlord, and the notices were not invalid. The court could consider ‘which of the provisions are substantive and which are secondary or ‘machinery’; and in relation to the latter, considering whether they are ‘essential parts of the mechanics or merely supportive of the other provisions’. Here the substantive provisions are those conferring the right to acquire the freehold. The secondary (machinery) provisions include the notice requirements of section 11A itself, and the formal requirements of section 54, including the requirement for the addresses.’

Judges:

Lord Justice Potter Lord Justice Carnwath

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 1760, Times 17-Feb-2004, [2004] 1 WLR 2319

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Landlord and Tenant Act 1987

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Kay-Green and Others v Twinsectra Limited CA 15-May-1996
The former landlord had sold a number of buildings, some of which fell within Part I of the 1987 Act. The section 5 notice had not been served. The vendor had also failed to comply with his duty (under s 5(5)) to ‘sever’ the transaction, and sell . .
Cited – Belvedere Court Management Ltd v Frogmore Developments Ltd CA 24-Oct-1995
Landlords had sold flats to Frogmore without serving a section 5 notice under the 1987 Act. Prior to receipt of a purchase notice, Frogmore granted certain leases in the block of flats to another party.
Held: The agreements were upheld, and . .
Cited – Burman v Mount Cook Land Ltd CA 20-Nov-2001
The tenant occupied a flat under a long lease at a low rent. She was entitled to acquire the freehold on payment of a premium and after following the procedure under the Act. The landlord served a purported counter notice which did not state in . .
Cited – Speedwell Estates Limited and Covent Garden Group Limited v Jane Rush Dalziel and others CA 31-Jul-2001
Tenants sought to purchase the freehold reversion of their properties under leasehold enfranchisement. The landlord objected that the forms were incomplete and invalid. The tenants accepted that there were defects, but asserted that these were not . .
Cited – Byrnlea Property Investments Ltd v Ramsay CA 1969
It was a requirement under the 1967 Act for the notice of a lessee, seeking to extend his interest under that Act, to indicate whether he was seeking the freehold or an extended lease. The tenant failed to do so.
Held: This failure was fatal. . .
Cited – Howard v Boddington 1877
. .
Cited – Howard v Secretary of State CA 1975
A notice of appeal was given against an enforcement notice, under the Act which required that an appeal should be made by notice in writing to the minister, ‘which shall indicate the grounds of the appeal and state the facts on which it is based’. . .

Cited by:

Cited – 7 Strathay Gardens Ltd v Pointstar Shipping and Finance Ltd and Another CA 15-Dec-2004
The tenants served a notice on the landlord to enfanchise their properties. The landlord’s counter-notice failed to state whether any estate management scheme existed. The tenants said the counter-notice was invalid.
Held: The landlord’s . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.188415

Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council v Torkington: CA 31 Oct 2003

The proposed landlord had sealed the lease, but the tenant was to seal and deliver his part by a certain date. The respondent purported to complete the lease later.
Held: Under the 1985 Act completion would require writing, intention and delivery. Sealing was insufficient. Section 74 of the 1925 Act did not refer to delivery. Here the authority had not intended to be bound immediately upon sealing. That intention was central. Sealing remained subjecvt to the satisfaction of the condition, and within the time set. The authority was not bound.

Judges:

Lord Justice Peter Gibson Lord Justice Waller Lord Justice Carnwath

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 1634, Times 13-Nov-2003, Gazette 13-Nov-2003, [2004] 4 All ER 238

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Companies Act 1989 130(2), Companies Act 1985 36A, Law of Property Act 1925 74

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Not followed – Beesly v Hallwood Estates Ltd 1960
A lease contained an option to renew. Both the lease and the reversion were assigned for value. The assignee of the lease exercised the option and a new lease and counterpart were engrossed. The tenant executed the counterpart. The assignee of the . .
Cited – Windsor Refrigerator Co Ltd v Branch Nominees 1961
‘A deed, whether executed by a corporation or by an individual, does not necessarily bind the grantor as soon as it is sealed. It only becomes binding when it has been ‘delivered’ by the grantor as his deed, i.e., when the grantor has indicated by . .
Cited – Mayor, Constables and Company of the Merchants of the Staple v Bank of England 1883
The sealing of a deed prima facie imported not only due execution but also delivery. ‘The affixing the seal is not enough; there must be delivery of the deed also . . . Prima facie, putting the seal imports delivery; yet, if it be intended . .
Cited – Longman v Viscount Chelsea CA 1989
(Obiter) The section did not dispense with the need for delivery of a deed executed by a corporation. . .
Cited – D’Silva v Lister House Development Ltd 1970
Even an unlawful sub-tenancy can have protection under Part II of the 1954 Act. The court described as fallacious the submission that section 74(1) does not extend to or answer the question whether the document has ever been delivered, saying: ‘The . .
Cited – Cope v Thames Haven Dock and Railway Co 1849
‘The subsection [on the execution of deeds by corporations] removes the necessity for enquiry as to the formalities required under the memorandum, articles, charter, etc., of the corporation; independently of this section the deed would be void . .
Cited – Xenos v Wickham HL 1866
Delivery of document in Escrow
Blackburn J said that a deed is delivered ‘as soon as there are acts or words sufficient to [show] that it is intended by the party to be executed as his deed presently binding on him.’
Lord Cranworth said: ‘The maker (of a deed) may so . .
Cited – Powell v London and Provincial Bank 1893
The requirement that it was necessary for an agent of a company delivering a deed to have been appointed under seal was surmountable by corporations giving officers authority by deed. . .
Cited – Vincent v Premo Enterprises (Voucher Sales) Ltd CA 1969
A lease and counterpart were engrossed and the counterpart was sealed by the defendant tenant company. The company raised with its solicitors the question as to the date from which rent was to run. Before the point was settled, the tenant sought to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.188112

Ealing Family Housing Association Ltd v McKenzie: CA 10 Oct 2003

The defendant and his wife separated when she left the flat they shared. She accepted a new tenancy of other premises. The landlord claimed possession of the flat, saying that the tenancy had ended.
Held: There was no express surrender within the 1989 Act. The landlord claimed an implied surrender under the 1925 Act. That required some act inconsistent with the continuance of a tenancy which created an estoppel against the tenant. The grant of a second tenancy could constitute such an act. The mere leaving of the apartment was insufficient. The notice to quit invalidated any earlier implication of surrender, but the changing of the rent book could constitute such an act.

Judges:

Mantell, Clarke LJJ, Rimer J

Citations:

Times 30-Oct-2003, [2003] EWCA Civ 1602, Gazette 20-Nov-2003

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 2, Law of Property Act 1925 52(2)(c)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Lyon v Reed 1844
The court examined the principle of the surrender of a lease by operation of law: ‘. . . all the old cases will be found to depend on the principle to which we have adverted, namely, an act done by or to the owner of a particular estate, the . .
Cited – Allen and Another v Rochdale Borough Council CA 23-Mar-1999
Land was sold. It had been used as playing fields. The freehold and leasehold interests in the land were held by the respondent, and the claimants asserted it was held as bare trustees for them as charitable trustees for the school foundation. The . .
Cited – Oastler v Henderson 1877
The tenancy was for seven years. Shortly after its creation, the tenant left the keys with the agent and asked him to dispose of it or make the best bargain for surrender he could, and left for America. A tenant not being found, the agent returned . .
Cited – London Borough of Brent v Sharma and Vyas CA 1992
A tenancy of a flat was granted to Miss Vyas. She occupied it with Mr Sharma. They later married. She moved out and was given the tenancy of a council house elsewhere. She then wrote to Brent, the landlords, to say she was no longer sharing with Mr . .
Cited – Sanctuary Housing Association v Campbell CA 18-Mar-1999
The claimant had granted a secure weekly tenancy of a maisonette to Mrs Campbell, which she occupied with her husband and children. Mrs Campbell then left the maisonette, leaving the husband in occupation. The husband made a proposal to the claimant . .
Cited – Hackney London Borough Council v Snowden CA 2001
A short notice to quit might be given by a landlord if accepted by a tenant. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant, Housing

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.187385

Kenny v Preen: 15 Oct 1962

A landlord’s threats to evict the tenant, accompanied by repeated shouting and knocking on her door, was held to be a breach of his covenant for quiet enjoyment. The court explained that ‘the word ‘enjoy’ used in this connection is a translation of the Latin word ‘fruor’ and refers to the exercise and use of the right and having the full benefit of it, rather than to deriving pleasure from it.’

Judges:

Pearson, Donovan, Ormerod LJJ

Citations:

[1963] 1 QB 499, [1962] EWCA Civ 2, [1962] 3 WLR 1233, [1962] 3 All ER 814

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Budd-Scott v Daniell 1902
The plaintiff had let a furnished house to the defendant for a year. Fom the outset the plaintiff was under a statutory obligation to paint the outside of the house during that year. In default, the statutory authority was empowered to do the work. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Southwark London Borough Council v Mills/Tanner; Baxter v Camden London Borough Council HL 21-Oct-1999
Tenants of council flats with ineffective sound insulation argued that the landlord council was in breach of the covenant for quiet enjoyment in their tenancy agreements.
Held: A landlord’s duty to allow quiet enjoyment does not extend to a . .
Cited – Mowan v London Borough of Wandsworth and Another CA 21-Dec-2000
The claimant tenant sought damages from the landlord and neighbour and fellow tenant for nuisance caused by the neighbour’s aberrant behaviour.
Sir Christopher Staughton said: ‘there is a strong trend in the cases in favour of the landlord who . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.186078