Case Law 12.10.23

Question 1

Lease & Licence Difference

Answer 1

Street v Mountford 1985

1. Exclusive possession
2. Term certain
3. Payment of rent
4. Either part can terminate at any time.
5. Cannot be assigned.
6. Personal right not interest in land.

Mountford occupied rooms in Streets premises. The agreement was labelled a licence. Mountford argued the agreement was a tendency, the court agreed.

Question 2

Time of essence, it would need to stake specifically if time was of the essence. If it is silent on the subject it is not.

Answer 2

United Scientific Holdings Ltd v Burnley Borough Council

Question 3

Ransom Strip and 1/3 of the value on the uplift of the development land.

Answer 3

Stokes v Cambridge

Question 4

Correction of Mistakes in leases

Answer 4

Chartbook Ltd v Persimmon Homes Ltd

Question 5

Pandemic clause refusal as not a fair modernisation

Answer 5

Poundland Ltd v Toplain Ltd 2021

Question 6

Firm and settled intention in regards to the works under grounds F and G and the date of proof to be the court hearing date.

Answer 6

Bettys café Ltd v Phillips Furnishing Stores Ltd 1958

Question 7

Case where the parties had agreed to a pandemic rent suspension clause and the courts were ask to determin how this would be triggered.

Answer 7

WH Smith Holdings Ltd v Commerz RI mbH (2021)

Question 8

The judgement as to when parties cannot agree in regards to a turnover rent, the court can order on a turnover rent. In this case the judge ordered that the 8% turnover rent was too high and did not reflect market value and therefore ordered a valuation based on ITZA calculation.

Answer 8

W (No. 3) GP (Nominee A) Ltd & W (No. 3) GP (Nominee B) Ltd v JD Sports Fashion Plc

Question 9

Landlord has to prove a firm and settled intention to carry out the works it is proposing under section 30.

Answer 9

S Franses Ltd v The Cavendish Hotel (London) Ltd 2017, appeal 2018

Question 10

landlord apposing renewal upon grounds a, b, c

Answer 10

Youssefi v Mussellwhite [2014]

Question 11

Assignment of a lease to a guarantor, obligations under the lease void.

Answer 11

EMI v O&H A1 Ltd 2016

Question 12

Lease Terms, fair and reasonable modernisation

Answer 12

***O’May v City of London Real Property Co Ltd (1983).

Summary
On the expiry of a five-year lease, the landlord proposed a new five year term. However, the proposed new lease transferred various obligations (as to repair and other services of the premises) to the tenant in return for a small reduction in rent. These proposals created a ‘clear lease’, resulting in the landlord’s interest in the premises becoming more valuable. Dismissing the landlord’s proposals, the Court of Appeal held that:

any departure from the terms of the current lease must be fair and reasonable in all the circumstances; and
the burden of persuading the court to change the terms of the current lease on its renewal is on the party proposing the change.