Site icon swarb.co.uk

London and Associated Investment Trust Plc v Calow: 1986

The defendants had sought premises for a consulting business. A licence was initially given to allow the premises to be prepared for occupation, but then a head lease was granted. An underlease for the defendant was prepared, but not executed. On the defendant leaving, the claimants said that the defendant was bound as tenant to pay the balance of the rent haiving taken exclusive occupation on the terms of he draft lease.
Held: The occupation had all the characteristics of a tenancy, and the principles in Street v Mountford applied also to commercial lettings. It was a tenancy.

Judges:

Paul Baker QC J

Citations:

[1986] 2 EGLR 80, [1987] 53 P and CR 340, [1986] 280 EG 1252

Citing:

AppliedStreet v Mountford HL 6-Mar-1985
When a licence is really a tenancy
The document signed by the occupier stated that she understood that she had been given a licence, and that she understood that she had not been granted a tenancy protected under the Rent Acts. Exclusive occupation was in fact granted.
Held: . .

Cited by:

CitedMann Aviation Group (Engineering) Ltd v Longmint Aviation Ltd and Another ChD 19-Aug-2011
Administrators of the claimant company asserted that the company had held informal leases of two hangars owned by the defendant, and also complained of their transfer at an undervalue. The first defendant said that the occupations were under license . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.443250

Exit mobile version