A tenancy of land used for training horses was a business tenancy within the 1954 Act. The word ‘premises’ is not defined in the Act. Its legal meaning is the subject matter of the habendum in a lease, and it would cover any sort of property of which a lease is granted. ‘… but no … Continue reading Bracey v Read: 1963

Citations: [2002] EWCA Civ 91, [2002] 15 EG 134 Links: Bailii Statutes: Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 Part II Jurisdiction: England and Wales Landlord and Tenant Updated: 27 November 2022; Ref: scu.216673

The tenant appealed against a decision that provision for parking should not be included in the new tenancy granted to him under the Act. The original lease had been intended to be varied to move the tenant to allow some rebuilding, and new parking spaces had been allocated. The move was made, but the lease … Continue reading The Picture Warehouse Ltd v Cornhill Investments Ltd: QBD 23 Jan 2008

The landlord served a notice to terminate the tenancy. By mistake the tenant’s solicitors served a counter-notice that their client did not wish to renew. Realising their mistake, they served a second counter-notice, purporting to revoke the first. The second notice was still within the two-month limit from the landlords section 25 notice. They now … Continue reading Pennycook v Shaws (EAL) Ltd: ChD 28 Nov 2002

The tenant’s large shed was fixed to the land. Held: It was a tenant’s fixture which could be removed by the tenant at the end of his tenancy, even though it was annexed to the land and formed part of it. Judges: Scott LJ Citations: [1940] 1 All ER 247 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited … Continue reading Webb v Frank Bevis Ltd: 1940

In order for the landlord to claim double rent where a tenant held over unlawfully after the tenancy was determined, the landlord must not do anything to indicate that the lease might be continuing, for example by denying the validity of break clause. In construing an Act, regard must be had to the whole of … Continue reading Oliver Ashworth (Holdings) Limited v Ballard (Kent) Limited: CA 18 Mar 1999

The ‘continuous occupation’ required of a tenant to support a claim for disturbance on the non-renewal of his lease under the Act is not to be lost for the normal incidents of business life. The tenant had anticipated the non-renewal of the tenancy and had closed his restaurant business in the last few weeks before … Continue reading Bacchiocchi v Academic Agency Limited: CA 20 Feb 1998

The tenant appealed against an order requiring the amendment of what was found to be an obvious error in the lease as to the responsibility of the lessor to make repairs to certain walls and rooves, and the apportionment of liability for payment of any associated costs. Held: The appeal succeeded. There was no obvious … Continue reading Campbell v Daejan Properties Ltd: CA 20 Nov 2012

Appeal against new rent fixed by court on renewal under the 1954 Act. Held: The judge had erred by not considering the passing rent agreed between the parties pending determination by the court, and has also disregarded the rent of the adjoining property. The matter was remitted. Judges: Mummery LJ, Keene LJ, Jacob LJ Citations: … Continue reading Trans-World Investments Ltd v Dadarwalla: CA 22 May 2007

The tenant sought a new lease. The landlord resisted saying that it intended to carry out works of a substantail nature which would require it to have possession. The tenant responded that the works were not structural. Held: The words of the section should be read as they are. There is no explicit requirement for … Continue reading Ivorygrove Ltd v Global Grange Ltd: ChD 18 Jun 2003

Judges: Mummery, Etherton, Sulllivan LJJ Citations: [2012] EWCA Civ 36 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: See Also – Humber Oil Terminals Trustee Ltd v Associated British Ports ChD 24-Feb-2011 The claimant sought to renew its leases of docking facilities from the landlord defendant. The defendant resisted saying it intended to operate its own … Continue reading Humber Oil Terminals Trustee Ltd v Associated British Ports: CA 27 Jan 2012

Judges: Sir Martin Nourse Mr Justice Patten Lord Justice Mance Citations: [2005] EWCA Civ 1036 Links: Bailii Statutes: Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 30(1)(f) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Cited – Gatwick Parking Service Ltd v Sargent CA 3-Feb-2000 When a landlord opposed a renewal of a business tenancy, the court must allow for changes … Continue reading Dogan v Semali Investments Ltd: CA 4 Aug 2005

Lord Denning MR doubted whether the mere letting of an incorporeal hereditament could be occupation so as to be the subject of a new tenancy within the 1954 Act. However, since the fishing rights had been used for the purposes of a business in connection with a room that was also let by the same … Continue reading Jones v Christy: CA 1963

The parties disputed whether a tenant’s counter-notice had been served within the time limit applicable. It was out of time if the time ran from the date of posting of the landlord’s notice, but not if timed from the date of receipt. Held: The Landlord’s appeal succeeded. Judges: Neuberger J Citations: [2003] EWHC 1252 (Ch), … Continue reading Beanby Estates Ltd v The Egg Stores (Stamford Hill) Ltd: ChD 9 May 2003

The landlord had served a notice under the 1954 Act. The tenant served a counter notice, but the question was whether he was late, or out of time. Held: The combination of the various provisions meant that the landlord’s notice had irrevocably been deemed to have been served and on the day it was posted. … Continue reading Beanby Estates Ltd v Egg Stores (Stamford Hill) Ltd: ChD 9 May 2003

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

The case concerned whether, under the Act, an incorporeal right of fishing, demised as part of a lease of an hotel, was part of the ‘premises’ for the purpose of the Act. Held: The standard conveyancing meaning of the word ‘premises’ has long been established as meaning the subject matter of the habendum of the … Continue reading Whitley v Stumbles: HL 1930

The question was whether under the 1977 Act the tenant occupied the premises for residential purposes. The landlord said that a business was also conducted from them. Held: The tenant had failed to establish that the business use had ceased. The court also his argument that, if his business use had ceased, he was protected … Continue reading Pulleng v Curran: CA 1980

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. … Continue reading Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council v Torkington: CA 31 Oct 2003

The plaintiffs had bought a cottage subjecty to a tenancy to the defendant. They sought possession saying that she held under a tenancy at will. It was a renancy for her life but described as a tenancy at will. The judge had held that the other terms were quite inconsistent with a tenancy at will. … Continue reading Binions v Evans: CA 27 Jan 1972

A prospective landlord and tenant applied to have the proposed tenancy excluded from security of tenure. The draft appended to the application had blanks for the dates, and a break clause. Held: The intention was to demonstrate the parties understanding of what they might be losing by way of security, and that the lease need … Continue reading The Receiver for the Metropolitan Police District v Palacegate Properties Ltd: CA 9 Feb 2000

UTLC LEASEHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT – house – price – condition – improvements – risk of tenant claiming Assured Tenancy- statutory assumptions – appeal allowed in part – Price determined at andpound;152,788 – Leasehold Reform Act 1967 section 9(1), Housing Act 1988 section 14(2)(b) and Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 Pt 1 Judges: P R Francis FRICS … Continue reading Sillvote Ltd v Liverpool City Council: UTLC 14 Jun 2010

The term was to expire on 25 March 1988. The landlord served a section 25(1) notice to determine the tenancy on 1 March 1989 to which the tenants responded with a notice under section 27(2) to determine the tenancy on 24 June 1988. In fact the tenants vacated the property on or immediately before 25 … Continue reading Longacre Securities Ltd v Electro Acoustic Industries Ltd: CA 1990

The tenant claimed compensation on the termination of the lease. He had occupied part of the premises for more than 14 years, but the rest for only 5 years. Held: The Act required only that some part of the building had been occupied, so long as the whole was occupied at the date of service … Continue reading Edicron v Whiteley: 1983

The parties wanted to enter into a business lease and to apply to the court for an order excluding protection under the 1954 Act. However they executed the lease and the tenant took up occupation before the order was obtained. Held: There was nothing to indicate any conditionality in the arrangement. The parties had created … Continue reading Essexcrest Ltd v Evenlex Ltd: 1998

The parties had started the renewal procedures under the 1954 Act. After the end of the contractual term, the tenant handed in the keys and purported to surrender the lease at common law. He did nothing to discontinue the proceedings. Held: The continuation of the tenancy under the Act did not prevent the possibility of … Continue reading Arundel Corporation Ltd v Financial Trading Company Ltd: 2000

When a landlord opposed a renewal of a business tenancy, the court must allow for changes in planning policy which affected the parties. Planning permission had originally been subject to a condition that it be used not by the claimant but by a tenant. That condition had been imposed under a policy which had now … Continue reading Gatwick Parking Service Ltd v Sargent: CA 3 Feb 2000

Depending on the evidence, a stepped rent may well be the best way to determine the rack rent value over a period of years so that an arbitrator might properly make such an award. This was particularly so where the landlord was in serious breach of repairing obligations, but was expected to deal with the … Continue reading Fawke v Viscount Chelsea: 1980

Preliminary issue in proceedings under Part 2 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 – short point on the construction of section 41A of the Act and in particular as to whether one of two existing partners who were both the tenants of the relevant holding under the existing lease is entitled to make an … Continue reading Lie v Mohile: CA 9 May 2014

Citations: [1979] 1 WLR 533 Cited by: Mentioned – Pointon York Group Plc v Poulton CA 13-Jul-2006 The lease included a right to use seven designated parking spaces. The parties disputed whether parking space could be occupied in such a way as to be given protection under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954. Held: A … Continue reading Morrisons Holdings Ltd v Madners Properties (Wolverhampton) Ltd: 1979

The court held that in all the reported cases where it was held that an agreement was a licence rather than a tenancy: ‘In all the cases where an occupier has been held to be a licensee there has been something in the circumstances, such as a family arrangement, an act of friendship or generosity, … Continue reading Facchini v Bryson: 1952

A landlord opposing the grant of a new tenancy on the basis that he wished to conduct his own business from the premises, need not show that everything is in place to conduct the new business, but must be able to show that most obstacles to starting the business have been dealt with. There is … Continue reading Gregson v Cyril Lord Ltd: CA 1962

A tenant challenged his landlord’s refusal of consent to an assignment. Held: The refusal was reasonable. The onus of proving that consent has been unreasonably withheld is on the tenant. It was not enough to show that other lessors might have accepted the proposed assignees; the lessors were not to be held to have witheld … Continue reading Shanly v Ward: CA 1913

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 against refusal. Held: The appeal failed. The date of the hearing at which the necessary intention … Continue reading Somerfield Stores Ltd v Spring (Sutton Coldfield) Ltd: ChD 4 Aug 2010

The landlord hoped to redevelop a site. The defendant was in possession as a business tenant pursuant to three successive leases for which orders had been made under section 38(4) of the 1954 Act excluding the operation of sections 24 to 28 of the Act. The last of the three leases expired on October 31 … Continue reading Cardiothoracic Institute v Shrewdcrest Ltd: ChD 1986

The words in section 38(1) ‘purports to’ means ‘has the effect that’ so that an agreement to give up possession in two years when the lease would still have six years to run infringed section 38 as it would preclude an application or request for a new tenancy even though an actual surrender was permitted … Continue reading Joseph v Joseph: CA 1967

The appellant is the landlord of business premises. The tenant, the respondent to this appeal, brought proceedings under Part II of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 for the grant of a new tenancy. The landlord resisted the application on the ground set out in section 30(1)(g), that he intended to occupy the premises for … Continue reading The Gulf Agencies Ltd v Ahmed: CA 3 Feb 2016

The question which arises on this appeal is whether it is open to the landlord to oppose the grant of a new business tenancy if the works which he says that he intends to carry out have no purpose other than to get rid of the tenant and would not be undertaken if the tenant … Continue reading S Franses Limited v The Cavendish Hotel (London) Ltd: SC 5 Dec 2018

The tenant had served a notice under the 2003 Act to acquire a new lease. The landlord in replying that he wished to redevelop the site, sought himself to define the extent of the ‘estate’ to include only the tenant’s apartment and a neighbouring one as ‘the whole or a substantial part of the premises … Continue reading Majorstake Ltd v Curtis: HL 6 Feb 2008

On a renewal of a tenancy a landlord’s counter-notice under section 26(6) relied on section 30(1)(f) and (g). Held: (Lord Keith dissenting) The court was bound to have regard to the position as it was on the date of the order. The landlord must have a ‘firm and settled intention’ as regards the proposed works. … Continue reading Betty’s Cafe Ltd v Phillips Furnishing Stores Ltd: HL 1958

Action for damages for breach of a repairing covenant on the expiry of a lease. The court looked at the intention required of a landlord to show an intended purpose to oppose renewal of a lease. Asquith LJ said: ‘An ‘intention’ to my mind connotes a state of affairs which the party ‘intending’ – I … Continue reading Cunliffe v Goodman: CA 1950

In September 1955 the landlords bought to adjoining shops which were about 250 years old and near the end of their life. They intended to undertake the demolition of the premises for which it was necessary to obtain possession, to rebuild on the site and to occupy the new buildings for the purpose of their … Continue reading Fisher v Taylors Furnishing Stores Ltd: CA 1956

A landlord purchased the reversion of a lease of a shop the building on three floors, and two years later, the tenancy being near its end, the tenant applied to the county court for the grant of a new tenancy under the landlord and Tenant Act 1954 section 24(1). Wishing to use the shop for … Continue reading Atkinson v Bettison: CA 1955

Tenants who used the premises which consisted of a yard, partly covered with cinders, on which stood only a wooden garage, covered about one-third of the site and a brick boundary wall adjacent to the highway for business purposes, applied for a new tenancy under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 Part 2. The landlords … Continue reading Housleys Ltd v Bloomer-Holt Ltd: CA 1966

The landlord served notice under section 25 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 terminating the business tenancy of a shop, which was used as a cafe and was one of three contained in a single building owned by the Landlord, and stating that he would oppose the Grant of a new tenancy on the … Continue reading Blackburn v Hussain: CA 1988

The court considered the determination of a new rent on the conversion of a long tenancy protected under Part I of the 1954 Act to an assured periodic tenancy under the 1988 Act. The tenant had carried out improvements which she now wanted to be discounted in calculating the rent. If it was not so … Continue reading Hughes v Borodex Ltd: CA 27 Apr 2010

The trustees of a tennis club took possession of tennis courts and a clubhouse under a lease, and sought a new lease under the 1954 Act. The landlord said that they were only licensees and in any event were not entitled to a new lease since they were not a business. The agreement clearly and … Continue reading Addiscombe Garden Estates Ltd v Crabbe: CA 1957

The tenant appealed against a finding that the landlord was entitled to resist renewal of its lease under the 1954 Act challenging the stated intention of the landlord to occupy the premises for its own business purposes. It said that the proposed business would be in direct substitution for itself, that that business was very … Continue reading Humber Oil Terminals Trustee Ltd v Associated British Ports: CA 10 May 2012

The lease included a right to use seven designated parking spaces. The parties disputed whether parking space could be occupied in such a way as to be given protection under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954.
Held: A parking space is an . .

The defendant contracted by parol to take space for his roundabout at a fair on three bank holidays. He attended and paid for only the first, and the landlord sued for the sums due for the subsequent days.
Held: Occupation of a property can . .