header-logo header-logo

10 December 2009 / Philip Sissons
Issue: 7397 / Categories: Features , Landlord&tenant , Property
printer mail-detail

Contracting out

Philip Sissons examines the effect of the decision in Newham v Van Staden

The operation of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 (LTA 1954) will be familiar to landlord and tenant practitioners. The Act affords security of tenure to business tenants so that a lease of commercial premises does not come to an end on the expiry of the contractual term but continues until terminated in accordance with the provisions of LTA 1954.

The effect of LTA 1954 can be excluded by agreement between the parties provided certain statutory requirements are met, and the decision in Newham v Van Staden [2008] EWCA Civ 1414, [2009] All ER (D) 131 (Apr) is of potentially wide-reaching effect in determining when an agreement which purports to exclude LTA 1954 will be effective.

Prior to amendments to LTA 1954 which came into force on 1 June 2004 (when a new s 38A was inserted into LTA 1954) it was necessary for the parties to apply to the court for an order authorising an agreement which excluded the security

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Martin Livingston joins Ogier in Cayman to strengthen regulatory support

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan announces 47 summer promotions across UK offices

NEWS
Consultant-led law firms should prepare for closer regulatory attention as oversight evolves
Artificial intelligence may draft workplace grievances, but employers cannot treat them any differently from conventional complaints
From dishonest claimants to judicial promotions and procedural skirmishes, the latest legal developments offer plenty for litigators to digest
Fresh guidance is set to influence how courts decide whether hearings take place online or in person
County Court judges remain divided over whether landlords can lawfully force entry to carry out essential safety inspections after tenants ignore access injunctions
back-to-top-scroll