6 - leases Flashcards
KEY CASE = essential characteristics of a lease describes by Lord Templeton
EXCLUSIVE POSSESSION FOR A TERM OF YEARS AT RENT
Street v Mountford
rent not essential - a shop was purchased for the purpose of development and it was sold to P expressly subject to a license whereby the licensee would retain the shop rent free until development took place. this was a lease
Ashburn Ansalt v Arnold
2 requirements
a term certain
exclusive possession
disapproval of requirement for term certain
Prudential Assurance v London Residuary Body
HoL looked to the substance of the agreement - a lease must grant exclusive possession of the property for a fixed period term at rent
Street v Mountford
four separate license agreements had been designed on different days. Different payment amounts and excluded exclusive possession. held to be license. Look to nature of accommodation and relationship between occupiers
AG securities v Vaughn
4 unities present. Cohabiting couple signed separate but identical license agreements. No exclusive possession and licensor had ability to invite others into the flat. Held to be a lease
Antoniades v Villiers
Exceptions - employment. Clergyman lived in church building
Glasgow Corporation v Johnstone
Exceptions - employment. Given room for domestic job
Barnes v Barratt
Generosity - CoA said no lease - deceased’s daughter
Marcroft Wagons v Smith
Exceptions - charitable accommodation - homeless hostel could not be exclusive possession
Westminster v Clarke
“equity will presume to be done what ought to be done”. Equitable lease
Walsh v Lonsdale
Termination of fixed term lease - notice - where fixed term lease contains ‘break clause’ all T’s need to act together. couple split and ex gf sends notice - but not effective
Hounslow v Pilling
termination of periodic tenancy - notice - periodic tenancy tenants do not need to act together - ex gf tried to terminate lease and she made him homeless
Hammersmith & Fulling v Monk
Landlord covenant - cannot act in manner inconsistent with the lease (letting neighbouring land for an incompatible use)
Harmer v Jumbil Tin Areas
