Greenwich London Borough Council v McGrady: CA 1982

A notice to quit given by one of two joint tenants without the consent of the other was effective to determine the periodic tenancy to which it related.
Sir John Donaldson MR said: ‘In my judgment, it is clear law that, if there is to be a surrender of a joint tenancy – that is, a surrender before its natural termination – then all must agree to the surrender, if there is to be a renewal, which is the position at the end of each period of a periodic tenancy, then again all must concur. In this case. Mrs McGrady made it quite clear by her notice to quit that she was not content to renew the joint tenancy on and after June 15, 1981. That left Mr McGrady without any tenancy at all, although it was faintly argued by Mr Osman that on, as he put it, the severance of a joint tenancy the joint tenant who did not concur was left with a sole tenancy. That cannot be the law, and no authority has been cited in support of it.
The only point that remains is whether Mr. McGrady is entitled to the protection of the Act of 1980 on the ground that what ‘was a secure contractual tenancy has been brought to an end. The short answer to that is that the Act of 1980 operates to give security where landlords give notice to quit; it does not give security where tenants give notice to quit.’

Judges:

Sir John Donaldson MR

Citations:

(1982) 46 P and CR 223

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedHowson v Buxton CA 1928
After one tenancy the former tenant as landlord’s representative became joint tenants with the new tenant who provided the funds and bought out the former tenants compensation rights. The landlord gave notice to terminate the tenancy, and the new . .
CitedLeek and Moorlands Building Society v Clark CA 1952
The court was asked whether one of two joint lessees could validly surrender the lease before the full period of the lease had run without the concurrence of the other joint lessee.
Held: Somervell LJ was in favour of the defendant lessees: . .

Cited by:

BindingHammersmith and Fulham London Borough Council v Monk CA 1990
Mr Monk and Mrs Powell held a tenancy of the council in their joint names. They fell out and Mrs Powell gave the contractual four week notice. Mr Monk objected that this should not have allowed the council to end the tenancy.
Held: The notice . .
CitedHammersmith and Fulham London Borough Council v Monk HL 5-Dec-1991
One tenant of two joint tenants of a house left and was granted a new tenancy on condition that the existing one of the house, still occupied by her former partner, was determined. She gave a notice to quit as requested, the council claimed . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 07 May 2022; Ref: scu.272270