Master Land Law Principles with detailed analysis on leases, licenses, tenant covenants, legal remedies, and statutory protections for property law coursework.
For property lawyers, it is of paramount importance to be able to distinguish between licenses, tenancies as well as covenants for the purpose of advising to the clients. In the following case, Lawrence Eugene now lives at the property “18 Acacia Avenue[1]”, Ealing by leasing the house under a written lease entered between “Roger Jenkins and Lawrence” on 1st January 2025. Some days ago, Roger told Lawrence that the property has been sold and that he must leave the house within 28 days. This situation forms part of LW50073E Land Law Summative, highlighting the importance of correctly identifying tenancy versus license.
6 Years | LLB
The main legal issue is whether there exists a “license or tenancy” between Roger and Lawrence since this will define the rights of Lawrence in occupying the house. In academic discussions, such cases are sometimes analysed with the support of an assignment writing service UK for educational purposes. The legal concern is what tenure Lawrence holding, tenancy or license because this will determine whether or not he can be ejected.
All tenancies give the tenant certain legal rights under the legal tenancy as stipulated in the “Housing Act 1988”. If the agreement is a license, the provision of the notice is not as demanding as the one described above. It was clearly stated in “Street v Mountford [1985] AC 809” that a lease is an agreement that attends to the matter of occupying a premises with the tenancy being exclusive, there is a term in the agreement whereby the parties agree on the times that the tenant is to possess the property and there is payment of a agreed cash consideration for the use of the property[2]. Under the “Housing Act 1988, Section 21” for assured short hold tenancies there are some reforms of the tenancy law and minimum periods are stated as two months. These principles are discussed in LW50073E Land Law Summative.
However, there are several reasons that point to the fact that this agreement that the two parties Roger and Lawrence have entered is a tenancy agreement despite it being referred to as a license. Firstly, rents are stipulated at £500, to be paid on a monthly basis while the payments were not well specified. The distinguishing features of the occupancy are: adequate written lease, exclusive possession as well as payment of 2500 as monthly rent which shows that Lawrence is a tenant.
It is clear that Lawrence is protected by law against eviction, and hence, Roger cannot eject Lawrence without proper notice of at least two months. According to the case and the “Housing Act 1988”, Lawrence is entitled to stay in the property until a proper notice is given.
Get assistance from our PROFESSIONAL ASSIGNMENT WRITERS to receive 100% assured AI-free and high-quality documents on time, ensuring an A+ grade in all subjects.
The analysis shows that the characteristics recognized in judicial practice. A lease conveys ownership right for a specific period of time and provides an estate in the land, while a license is the right to occupy some land without ownership. In Street v Mountford (1985), it was confirmed that the part occupancy, legal possession, legal reversion, and rent are the important constituents of lease. In applying the above principles [Leave of the property], the agreement in contention can be classified as a lease based on the following reasons [Property has been sold]. This classification is supported by the discussion in LW50073E Land Law Summative.
As for the covenants’ entailing the successors, the old law under Spencer’s Case (1583) is that these could only bind the successors in case of privity of estate; the new law under the Landlord and Tenant (Covenants) Act 1995 distinguishes between new and old tenancies.
This section provides legal guidance to Colin regarding the enforcement of tenants’ covenants under the lease, analyzing which parties can be held liable for breaches and the extent of legal remedies available. The discussion refers to established principles under the Law of Property Act 1925 and relevant case law, forming part of LW50073E Land Law Summative.
In the following case, Colin, the freeholder of Blackacre is asking whether Colin can “sue Ana, Janice or Howard” for breach of lease covenants, which include; failure to pay rent, sublease without permission, use of the property for business, as well as organizing Portuguese lessons.
The “law of property Act of 1925” covenants running with the land are enforceable persons who are bound by the covenant and other successors as well[3]. The covenants are passed with the lease in terms of the “Landlord and Tenant (Covenants) Act 1995”. In “Spencefield case 1583 (5Co.Rapp 16a)” it was held that covenants which are touching and concerning the land are capable of being enforced against the successors[4].
As the lease passed to Janice from Colin, besides lending money to Ana, Colin cannot spearhead a lawsuit against Colin for rent arrears. It is worthy to note that under the “Law of Property ct 1925” personal covenants do not run with the land. Not liable as she has assigned the lease as it renders her incapable of performing its obligations.
Janice: Colin has specified legal rights in relation to rent, subletting and business use of the property and therefore Janice can be sued. Liable for unpaid rent as per “Landlord and Tenant (Covenants) Act 1995”.
Howard: Colin can actually take legal action against Howard for converting the property for business uses, despite being a subtenant, and according to the covenants on the lease, business use was prohibited. It also means that Colin is free to sue both Janice and Howard in person for the breaches though he cannot ass or sue Ana.
If Colin is able to recover such costs from the tenant Ana, Colin is not bounded by any legal parameters of the lease period as far as the amount of rent that can be claimed is concerned. According to the “Law of Property Act 1925”, the repairing covenant in the lease is capable of being invoked by Colin, the current freeholder. Section five of the “Landlord and Tenant Act 1987” also highlights that the former tenant is not responsible unless there is an agreement made[5]. In the case of “Re King’s Leasehold Trusts [1952] Ch 123”, it should be important to note that Ana may remain liable only if she guaranteed the payment to Janice. Thus, if some structural damages are required, then Colin has an opportunity to use “Law of Property Act 1925 covenants”.
Jutland Enterprises can “sue Anne Holman” for the rent under the covenant since the lease has been transferred to Harry Clinton. According to the “Law of Property Act 1925”, whenever a lease is assigned, the original tenant Anne can be still legally bound to pay the rent until he/she is released from this responsibility[6]. Capping and consolidation do not affect liability of original tenants unless covenants and releases by them are given under “liability of covenants act 1995”[7]. In the case of “Tulk v Moxhay [1848] 2 Ph 774” it was held that the positive covenants do not run with the land while “Stuart v Joy [1904] 1 KB 362” held that contractual obligation stays until the release by assignment.
Anne was under the tenancy agreement as the original tenant and not officially released thus she had to pay for the unpaid rent according to “London Diocesan Fund v Avonridge Property Co Ltd [2005] EWCA Civ 1462”.
Therefore, it is suggested that Jutland Enterprises can specifically apply the rent payment covenant against Anne Holman.
A case in hand involves “Bill Glover, an assignee of a lease” who does not wash and wax a car as per the covenant provided in the lease, every Monday morning.
Jutland Enterprises can take legal action against “Bill Glover an assignee of the lease and demand compliance” of the car washing covenant but cannot do the same to John Douglas the tenant[8]. Apart from the covenants in leases being absolute, the “Law of Property Act 1925” places a provision where covenants in leases may run with the land and therefore bind the original tenant as well as any assignees of the lease.
Situational analysis on the capacity of Jutland Enterprises to make the car-washing covenant contractual enforceable against Bill Glover and John Douglas.
In terms of “Section 19(1) (a) Landlord and Tenant Act 1954”, lease covenants can be assigned to the assignees if they pertain to the subject matter of the assignment[9]. As cited in “Austerberry v Oldham Corporation [1885] 29 Ch D 750”, the difference between personal and real coven views of covenants was established. Also, in “Hua Chiao Commercial Bank Ltd v Chiaphua Industries Ltd [1987]”, it translates the principle that an assignee takes subject to the lease covenants and that he or she is not let off the hook for any breaches by a prior assigns who was given the lease contract.
Bill Glover is directly subject to the lease covenant as an assignee depending on the case “Hua Chiao Commercial Bank Ltd v Chiaphua Industries Ltd [1987]”. Again, since John Douglas is the subtenant, he is not able to be bound by the original covenants which were entered through “Privity of Contract and Privity of Estate”[10]. Jutland Enterprises is entitled to prevent Bill Glover to do certain activities but cannot do so unto John Douglas because he is not bound by the covenant that was signed in the lease.
References
Online
Introduction This paper aims to discuss available non-pharmacological and pharmacological interventions aimed at supporting...View and Download
Question 1. For the first case the pathogen is Chlamydia trachomatis. The female came to the clinic with complaints of...View and Download
1. Discuss STEMI, considering the following: definition, pathophysiology, epidemiology and the risk factors/possible causes and...View and Download
2. Evaluate what necessitates a physical examination of the client prior to the aesthetic procedure Prior to the aesthetic...View and Download
Maximum Likelihood Solutions This solution explains key ideas in maximum likelihood estimation step by step to support your...View and Download
Q1. Further Laboratory-Based Diagnostic Tests for Identification of the Microorganism Effective treatment and management of...View and Download
Copyright 2025 @ Rapid Assignment Help Services
