Property Case List

King v David Allen

Lease v License

License cannot be passed to successor in title, no in rem

Street v Mountford

Test for lease = EP + Term + Rent

Pretoria Energy

Certain start for term

Lace v Chantler

Certain end for term, max possible duration (war time)

Prudential Assurance

Lease void for uncertainty of end → “until needed” by council

Hammersmith v Monk

Periodic tenancy

1 tenant can leave without consent of other tenant

Notice of 1 period

PT requires all to desire continuation

Javad v Aqil

No periodic tenancy if parties have contrary intentions (or still negotiating)

Berrisford

Berrisford workaround

Southward Housing

Berrisford workaround only applied if parties intended for lease for life

Failed

Gilpin v Legg

If no intention to give lease for life, becomes yearly tenancy

Critiqued Berisford workaround

AG Securities

4 tenants started agreements for 6 months but different rent, 4 unities, no joint tenancy

Antoniades

Couple rented 1 bed with different agreements, no unity of title but court exposed sham based on facts, yes joint tenancy

Aslan

Retention of keys and its purpose

Markou

Genuine services, unrestricted access

Marchant

does not matter if licensee refuses services

Mikeover

Unity of interest - rent has to be paid jointly (cannot be paid in seperate halves even if equal amount)

Hunts Refuse Disposals

Sole and limited purpose = no EP

Appah

Hotels = no EP

Abbeyfield

Carehomes = no EP

Facchini

Employee paying rent and accomodation not necessary or assisting job = valid lease

Norris

Employee occupies for better performance of duties = service occupancy licensee

Heslop

No agreement or rent between friends = personal license

Nunn

Family renting from family at market value + EP = lease

Cobb

sister let brother live for free for 13 years = no intention to create legal relations = license

Ashburn

Rent no longer required

LPA s20(s1) xxviii

Bruton

Bruton tenancy

Can’t give lease when you have license yourself

Kay v Lambeth

Followed Bruton (but same housing block)

B tenancy does not bind superior landlord

Nidai

Similar facts as Bruton but critiques it

B tenancy cannot bind third parties

Cabo v Dezotti

Failed application of Bruton

Camelot Roynon

Lease of individual room but license of common areas

Camelot Khoo

Property guardianship is license

Laleva

Property guardianship authority - license due to purpose

Lysaght

when property bought, trust created

trustee - seller

beneficiary - buyer

Walsh v Lonsdale

lease can be good in equity (doc of anticipation) if not good in law s2(3) LPA

Coatsworth

Specific performance needs to be available for doc of anticipation

Baker v Craggs

courts have discretion over actual occupation

physical precense, nature of property, permanence and continuity, physical not person, intentions, absence

Rosset

workers building on land before moving in = actual occupation

Bustard

person sectioned for mental health still in actual occupation

Flegg

disposition by two or more trustees overreaches beneficial interest s2(2) LPA

grant of legal charge can overreach

Sood

payment of actual money unnecessary for valuable consideration (promise to increase credit limit sufficed)

Williams v Boland

beneficial interest in land that is not overreached upon sale is an overriding interest when the beneficiary is in actual occupation s70(1)g LPA

Abbey National

Actual occupation requires permanence

Chaudhary

Easements not capable of becoming ovverriding interests by actual occupation

Chhokar

Furniture at home satisfies physical presence = actual occupation

Thompson v Foy

Parties must be in actual occupation at time of disposition (deed and registration) sch 3(2)

Southern Pacific v Scott

Purchaser of land does not have sufficient interest for equitable property right before competion of sale

Goodman v Gallant

share is equal regardless of amount contributed to purchase price

Re Scarle

when order of death uncertain, younger person presumed to have survived the older s184 LPA

Re Draper’s Conveyance

court summons for order of sale constitutes written notice under s36 LPA

Harris v Goddard

desire to bring about the result sometime in the future (as opposed to immediately) is insufficient

Kinch v Bullard

Notice served following postal rule

Registered post - effective when posted unless returned or undelivered

Unregistered post - effective when arrived

Re 88 Berkeley Road

Does not matter if notice is read

Williams v Hensman

3 ways of severance:

1) acting on own share - enforceable contract s2 LP(MP)A, gifting, bankruptcy, never will

2) mutual agreement

3) course of dealing

Burgess v Rawnsley

Discussions amounted to mutual agreement to become tenants in common (course of dealing)

One party makes clear…

Davis v Smith

Divorced couple planned to sell, went to solicitor, wife died before in writing, sufficient for course of dealings

Gould v Kemp

Acting on one’s own share to end JT → never by a will

Greenfield v Greenfield

Express statement to be JT

physical division is not severance

survivorship to other JT once one dies

White v White

TOLATA s15(1)(b)

Purpose of property must be common intention of parties at the time trust was created

Bell

Interest of creditors > others under s14 and 15 TOLATA

Court has great flexibility for s15 factors (intention, purpose, welfare minors, interest creditors, wishes)

Order for sale allowed - wife’s beneficial interest only 10%

Achampong

Marriage effectively over, children adults

Interest of creditors > interest of the family

Edwards v Lloyds

s15 analysis

Children young and woman broke so couldn’t afford new home

Order for sale postponed 5 years for children to be of age

Shaire

Order for sale denied where wife had 75% beneficial interest after discretionary s15 analysis

Slayford

All means persued as soon as mortager is in default

Unil full payment recovered

Four Maids

mortgagee may go into possession before ink is dry on mortgage

Ropaigealach

Traditional - lenders take possession via self-help

Then peaceful entries s6(1) Criminal Law Act 1977

Now possession order under s126 Consumer Credit Act 1974

Quennell

Possession sought bona fide and reasonably for the purpose of security

(kicking students out shadily)

Bristol v Ellis

lenders right to possession worrying - impact on borrower’s family

Cheltenham

guidance on s36 AJA 1970 - reasonable period

reasonably afford, temporary difficulty, reason arrears, remaining original term, contractual terms, court disregard s8 1973, reasonable to expect lender, reasons security

Cukurova

approved Quennell

Silven

Mortgagee in possession has no duty to exercise power of sale

Required to take reasonable care of property, not required to improve it

Southern v Barnes

Time order- “just to do so”

Consideration of all circumstances incl position of debtor and creditor

Downsview

Powers conferred on mortgagee must be exercised in good faith for purpose of obtaining repayment

Meretz

genuine motive to remake debt (even if other motives too) = sale will not be invalidated

Tse Kwong

mortgagee true sale (not self, own company, but can company of interest)

Cuckmere

mortgagee free to decide when to sell but duty of good faith and reasonable care to obtain market value at time of sale

Waring

borrower’s equity of redemption suspended once lender exercises power of sale

Hotak

Vulnerability - housing act 1996

less able to cope w homelessness than ordinary homeless person

third party support realistically assessed

proper consideration of disability

Denton

Intentional homelessness

reasonableness of rules

family issues does not mean lack of intentional homelessness

local authority discretion on facts

Baptie

intentional homelessness where accomodation objectively affordable but lost through arrears

AHAS minimum expenditure figures to assess affordability

Nzolameso

Councils must house homeless applicants within district or so far as reasonably possiblem, real effort and evidence

Duty to give reasons

URS

Developer repaired defects post Grenfel before claims then sought costs from engineers

Vulnerability, Building Safety Act 2022, S1 DPA 1972

Adriatic Land

Landlords cannot recover pre 2022 building safety costs via service charges

Tenant protection → landlords stopped from passing on remediation costs

Triathlon Homes

Remediation Contribution Orders under BSA 2022 retrospective

Deverlopers liable, tenant protection → shift costs back

Ellenborough

Houses surrounding park - 4 substantive criteria

dominant and servient land, diff owners, easement must accomodate dominant land, right capable of forming subject matter of land

Hill v Tupper

right must ‘accomodate’ land, connected to enjoyment of land, not personal enjoyment or business (boats )

Moody

Right benefiting business on dominant land can be valid (pub sign) if business itself not easement

No need for physical connection between dominand land and easement

Regency Villas

Accomodate land = facts dependent

Courts more amenable to finding new positive easements

Leisure recreational facilities

No positive obligation on servient owner

Phipps v Pears

Courts reluctant to find new negative easements

(neighbour house protect from weather)

Hunter v Canary Wharf

Certainty in scope of grant - sufficiently certain

No negative burden on servient owner

Copeland

Parking 9-5, owner could not use

Ouster principle

Ladbroke

Test of relative size for ouster

No longer applies after Montcrieff

Batchelor

Reasonable use test for ouster principle

Moncrieff

More permissive standard for ouster test - retains sufficient possession and control

Regency affirmed

Virdi

Confirmed Montcrieff did not overrule Batchelor

Applied Batchelor test

Wheeldon

Implied easement rule:

continous and apparent, necessary for enjoyment of property conveyed, enjoyed by vendor when he owned both dominant and servient

mostly covered in s62, but still operates upon creation/ transfer of equitable interest (s62 needs deed)

Wright v Macadam

license can become lease under s62

Diversity of occupation (coal shed)

Wood v Waddington

Continuous and apparent use suffices where no prior diversity of occupation (s62)

P&S Platt v Crouch

If rights used for benefit of land sold at time of sale → continous and apparent even without prior diversity of occupation

Darwall

Right to wild camp - open air recreation

“on foor and horseback” limits access, not activities once access gained

Baron Bernstein v Skyviews

Pics of rich lord land from plane

No trespass - land goes as high as is necessary for ordinary use and enjoyment of land and structures upon it