header-logo header-logo

05 December 2014 / Nicholas Dobson
Issue: 7633 / Categories: Features , Property
printer mail-detail

A proportionate response

nicholas-dobson

Nicholas Dobson reports on a Supreme Court ruling on terminating a joint tenancy

“The past,” observed LP Hartley in his successfully filmed 1953 novel, The Go Between, “is a foreign country: they do things differently there”.

Often, perhaps, but not always. For, although legal life was undoubtedly rather different in December 1991, pre-the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA 1998), when the House of Lords handed down its decision in Hammersmith and Fulham LBC v Monk [1992] 1 AC 478, [1992] 1 All ER 1, the Supreme Court recently upheld the principle established in that case.

This was that, where a joint tenancy is periodic and terminable by a notice to quit, the common law rule is that (subject to any contractual term to the contrary) the tenancy will be validly determined by service on the landlord of a notice to quit by only one of the joint tenants.

The recent case in question was Sims v Dacorum Borough Council [2014] UKSC 63, [2014] All ER (D) 126 (Nov), judgment in which was given

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

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll