A long lease at a premium and a low rent comprised three rooms at the top of a building. Clause 7 provided that the landlord should be entitled to buy the residue of the lease for andpound;2,500 if either the tenant gave notice to the landlord that he wished to vacate the premises or the landlord gave notice to the tenant that he wished to sell the building with vacant possession. It was contended that the proviso to s.17 applied to an agreement to surrender in the future as it applied to a present surrender.
Held: The request was dismissed. Joseph was analogous and any other conclusion would drive a coach and horses through the Act. Clause 7 to be void.
Judges:
Sir Anthony Plowman V-C
Citations:
[1975] 1 Ch 252
Statutes:
Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 17
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Joseph v Joseph CA 1967
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 . .
Cited by:
Cited – Tiffany Investments Ltd and Another v Bircham and Co Nominees (No 2) Limited and others CA 4-Dec-2003
The tenancy was a long lease at a low rent under the 1954 Act, and so had continuing protection under the 1977 Act whilst occupied by the original tenant. The lease was assigned and registered. It had been conditional upon an application to purchase . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Landlord and Tenant
Updated: 13 May 2022; Ref: scu.192033
