Search

How can we help?

Icon

A Business Partner`s Entitlement to Apply for a new Lease under the landlord and tenant act 1954

The Court of Appeal (CA) has very recently decided that an application for a new business tenancy made by one of two business partners was not a valid application where the existing lease was held by both partners.  The CA’s decision held that both joint tenants must join in any application for a new tenancy under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 (“the Act”) unless there is an applicable statutory exception.  The case in question is Lie v Mohile [2014] EWCA Civ 728.

 Under the Act the tenant of a business lease has a statutory right to a new lease at the end of the contractual term if it satisfies section 23 of the Act.  The qualifying criteria can be broken down as follows:

  • Is there a tenancy?
  • Does the tenancy relate to premises?
  • Are the premises occupied for the purpose of a business?
  • Is the business carried on by the tenant?
  • Does the tenancy fall within any of the specific exclusions?

If the first four conditions are satisfied (and the tenancy does not fall within any of the specific exclusions), the tenant will have a statutory right to a lease renewal at the end of the contractual term.

The Lie v Mohile case concerned a medical partnership comprising two GPs whose practice operated from a property, the freehold title of which was owned by Dr Mohile, one of the two partners.  He granted a periodic tenancy to himself and his partner, Dr Lie, the rent for which was paid by the relevant PCT.

The relationship between the partners soured and Dr Mohile (M) gave notice to Dr Lie (L) to dissolve the partnership and terminate the periodic tenancy.  L applied for a new tenancy under the Act, which M opposed on the basis that he wished to practice as a sole practitioner from the property.  The judge in the court of first instance imposed an injunction, restraining M from excluding L from the property, but L’s application for a new tenancy was refused.  The judge ordered that the injunction remain in place until the dissolution proceedings were concluded.  L appealed the decision not to grant a new tenancy to him.

If the first four conditions are satisfied (and the tenancy does not fall within any of the specific exclusions), the tenant will have a statutory right to a lease renewal at the end of the contractual term.

The CA held that the “tenant” for the purposes of any new tenancy must be all the joint tenants under the previous lease and any application would need to be made by all of those joint tenants.  Section 41A of the Act creates an exception where not all the joint tenants continue to use the demised premises for the purpose of the partnership.  The CA decided that the section 41A exception would not apply in this case as both tenants continued to operate from the same premises.

This case sends a message to all those working in partnerships to consider how property is held and managed by their partnership.  It is important to understand the legal structure surrounding practice property and its relationship with events that may occur during in the lifetime of the partnership.  It is also important for business tenants to be aware of the Courts strict interpretation of the statutory provisions surrounding the renewal of business tenancies. The CA has made it clear that all joint tenants must apply for a new tenancy under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 for it to be valid unless a statutory exception applies and that the Courts are not prepared to consider extensions or additions to the exceptions already in place.

About this article

Disclaimer
This information is for guidance purposes only and should not be regarded as a substitute for taking legal advice. Please refer to the full General Notices on our website.

About this article

Read, listen and watch our latest insights

art
  • 20 September 2023
  • Commercial Real Estate

Is your property mixed use? Commercial buyers beware of higher residential SDLT

This article discusses a recent case in which a property buyer calculated the Stamp Duty Land Tax due on the purchase at a lower rate, due to the mixed-use purpose of the property.

art
  • 08 August 2023
  • Commercial Real Estate

Non-binding Head of Terms

The Court of Appeal Case of Pretoria Energy Company (Chittering) Ltd v Blankney Estates Ltd found that a lease clause within a Heads of Terms document was not binding.

art
  • 11 July 2023
  • Commercial Real Estate

What licences do you need to open a restaurant?

Opening and operating a restaurant can be an exciting venture, but it also involves navigating various legal requirements. One crucial aspect of operating a restaurant is obtaining the necessary licences and permits.

art
  • 12 June 2023
  • Commercial Real Estate

Conditionality in Agreements for Lease

It is not always possible or desirable for an agreement for lease to be unconditional.  Often, there is a need for an agreement for lease where the ultimate grant of the lease is conditional upon certain conditions being satisfied. 

art
  • 10 May 2023
  • Commercial Real Estate

Good news for landowners – deposit statement introduced to protect against town green registration

For many years it has been possible under Section 31(6) of the Highways Act 1980 to deposit a statement and map with the local highway authority setting out any public rights of way which are registered as crossing a piece of land.

art
  • 28 March 2023
  • Commercial Real Estate

Can I have access to a neighbour’s land to carry out works to my property?

We are often asked by landowner clients whether there is any legal right to go on to a neighbour’s land to carry out repair and maintenance works where it is not possible to carry out such works from the landowner’s own property and there is no legal right in place allowing access to the neighbour’s land.