header-logo header-logo

26 September 2014 / Steven Woolf
Issue: 7623 / Categories: Features , Landlord&tenant , Property
printer mail-detail

Weighing up justice

The judge’s discretion on a 1954 Act tenancy renewal still carries a great deal of weight, says Steven Woolf

The Court of Appeal has in Youseffi v Mussellwhite[2014] EWCA Civ 885 recently revisited the extent of the judge’s discretion when determining how the grounds for opposition advanced by a landlord under s 30(1) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 (LTA 1954) should operate.

The legislation

As is well known, a landlord has to rely upon at least one of seven available grounds under s 30(1) of LTA 1954 in opposition to a request for the renewal of a commercial tenancy. In respect of grounds (a), (b) and (c), a landlord has also to satisfy a court that, in the exercise of the judge’s discretion, a new lease “ought not to be granted”.

Application of the law

What is interesting is the interaction between the past and the future. In the first place the court has to establish (as a matter of fact) that, for example, under ground (a) there has

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll