Leases & Licences Flashcards

1
Q

What are the two questions that must be asked when dealing with a lease problem question?

A

The content question (what is the content of the rule?)
The acquisition question (has the right been validly created?)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What are the requirements for a lease (CONTENT)?

A

Street v Mountford
There must be grant of exclusive possession of the property for a fixed or periodic term for rent

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Is the rent requirement always necessary for a lease to exist?

A

No, Ashburn Anstalt v Arnold

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What does the case of Aslan v Murphy tell us?

A

-If a landlord retains the right to enter the property then this does not mean the exclusive possession element will fail
-If a pretence is identified this does not mean that the lease is a sham, these provisions can be removed to grant a lease

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What is legal periodic tenancy?

A

Prudential Assurance Co Ltd v London Residuary Body
Where an original agreement is void but tenants have moved in and paid rent, the agreement becomes a legal periodic tenancy. This can only occur where the agreement is terminable by one months notice

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What does s149(6) Law of Property Act 1925 do and what was the purpose of this?

A

Converts a lease of an uncertain term into a 90 year lease, this is because prior to this the common law made an uncertain term a life estate, created too many interests in the land and LPA 1925 wanted to limit the amounts of interest

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

What does the case of Berrisford v Mexfield tell us?

A

Where a tenancy agreement does not have a certain term, it is not void but creates a tenancy in common law which under s149(6) LPA 1925 becomes a 90 year lease
Under common law it first becomes a life tenancy which is then converted pursuant to the section

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

When will s149(6) not apply?

A

Southward Housing v Walker
Where it is contrary to the parties intention, i.e. positive intent through words or statement in PQ

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What is a Bruton tenancy?

A

Bruton v London and Quadrant Housing Trust
A mere licensee can grant a ‘Bruton lease’ out of his licence that does not confer any proprietary interest in land. when a person with exclusive possession of a commercial property has a legal contract with someone who does not have legal title to the property. The tenant in a Bruton tenancy has a limited property right, but no legal estate in the property. This means that the tenant cannot pass the lease on to third parties

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What are the three formality rules that must be complied with in order for a lease to be created? (ACQUISITION)

A

Contract, Deed and Registration

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

When must a contract be used?

A

s2(1) Law of Property Act (Miscellaneous Provisions) 1989, a contract for any disposition must be in writing
UNLESS
s2(5)(a) it is a lease mentioned in s54(2) LPA 1925, i.e. shorter than 3 years

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

What are the rules on a deed?

A

-s52(1) Law of Property Act 1925, all conveyances of land or any interest there in are void unless made by deed
-Deed not need for a lease less than three years under s54(2)
-s1 LPA (MP) 1989, a deed will not be a deed unless expressly stated on the face and is validly executed
-However, if a deed is not created but a contract exists, a person can get an equitable right pursuant to Walsh v Lonsdale

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What is the difference between a legal right and an equitable right?

A

-Equitable lease will arise where there is no deed (incomplete)
-No claim over third parties if you only have an equitable right

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

How would a person with lease try to stop a third party from having their property?

A

Land Registration Act 2002
-Claimant would say interest takes priority due to s28, other person would try to argue s29 applies to them
-C would then rely on schedule 3 para 1 if the lease is less than 7 years
-Could also rely on actual occupation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

When will schedule 3 paragraph 1 not work in protecting a lease?

A

-When it is a period of more than 7 years, therefore if given a 90 year lease under s149(6) LPA 1925 this would not work
-Where the person only has an equitable lease, City PBS v Miller, does not include agreements with a merely contractual effect

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

What is a sham and how is this different to a pretence?

A

-Sham is both parties to the transaction conspiring to do something other than stated, both parties dishonest
-Pretence, agreement made in which there is a provision in order to stop it being a lease (Antonios v Villard)

17
Q

What is a licence?

A

One party is given liberty to use land belonging to another person
Does not give the person exclusive possession to the land, do not give any legal interest only a personal right

18
Q

What is the difference between a bare licence and a contractual licence?

A

BARE: Simply giving personal permission by the landowner to enter the land, essentially right to not be a trespasser (Thomas v Sorrell)
CONTRACTUAL: B has liberty to use As land and A is under a contractual duty to B to not revoke this right

19
Q

What was the decision in Manchester Airport v Dutton and why is this special?

A

The airport was given the right for possession to an area of land to which they only had a licence over. Laws Lj said it was necessary to give effect to the licensee’s rights under the contract with the licensor. Inconsistent with earlier cases such as Hill v Tupper