There was a tenancy from year to year of 7 acres which had on them three cottages, which the tenant in fact sub-let to persons not engaged in agriculture. The tenancy itself contained provisions usual in agricultural tenancies, and the tenant used the land for agriculture. The judge held that the protection afforded to the tenant by the Act in invalidating a notice to quit was limited to land used for agriculture and did not extend to the cottages.
Held: Either the whole of the property demised was subject to the protection of the Act or no part. It took as the test of whether or not the Act applied, whether or not the tenancy was in substance an agricultural tenancy
Judges:
Somervell LJ, Jenkins LJ, Hodson J
Citations:
[1951] 1 KB 614
Statutes:
Agricultural Holdings Act 1948 1
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – McGowan and Gibbons v Jewell CA 28-Feb-2002
The tenant took farm premises subject to a lease allowing its use for farming purposes only. It prevented its use as a market garden, which would have allowed compensation to be claimed on its termination. He had come to operate several activities . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Landlord and Tenant, Agriculture
Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.183198
