Leases

Question 1

Street v Mountford [1985]

Answer 1

• sets out the terms of a lease/ put an end to “sham” licences
• facts: Street granted Mountford the right to occupy two rooms in his house, with exclusive possession, for a weekly rent and determinable on 14 days’ notice. Street had Mountford sign a declaration that the right to occupy constituted a licence and not a lease
• held: exclusive possession, for a term at a rent constitutes a lease (actions/ facts trump the attempt of street to construe a mere licence)

Question 2

Lace v Chantler [1944]

Answer 2

• H: leases must have a determinable and certain term.
• H: a purported lease, “for the duration of the war” was held as invalid. A lease must before commencing have a certain term as to the duratIon.

Question 3

Prudential Assurance Co Ltd. v London Residuary Body

Answer 3

F: purported lease on the terms, ‘until the council needed to widen the roads, for two months notice’
H: lord templeman: lease was void due to uncertainty of term
Cf: lord brown wilkinson (why do we have this rule?!): “This bizarre outcome results from the application of an ancient and technical rule of law which requires the maximum duration of a term of years to be ascertainable from the outset. No one has produced any satisfactory rationale for the genesis of this rule. No one has been able to point to any useful purpose that it serves at the present day.”

Question 4

Mexfield Housing Co… [2011]

Answer 4

Importance of case: developments re: consequences of voidness for uncertainty. (Cf: Previously the courts replaced the failed lease with an implied periodic tenancy where the tenant had been in possession)
H:In the absence of any contrary intention, an agreement to create a month to month tenancy did create a monthly periodic tenancy

Question 5

Bruton v London Quadrant Housing Trust [2000]

Answer 5

F: Lambeth council licensed property to London Quadrant trust to be used as temporary housing. LQ purported to grant Bruton exclusive possession over part of his property; agreement labelled as a licence.
H: apply street v mountford, LQ’s agreement was held to be a lease, despite having no title in which to grant a lease from (e.g. they had no lease or fee simple)

Question 6

Colchester Council v Smith

Answer 6

Case authority: rent could prove an intention to create legal relations

Question 7

David v LB Lewisham

Answer 7

Rent: may be based on family relations

Question 8

Norris v Checksfield

Answer 8

Rent: may also be an agreement of employment