Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T06:35:23.346Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Shams, Pretences, Subterfuges and Devices

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 November 2001

Get access

Extract

The statutory security of tenure conferred upon the tenants of private residential property has long been (to mix two metaphors) a fertile battle ground, with landlords and their legal advisers showing great ingenuity in devising agreements designed to circumvent the provisions of the legislation. Most famously, of course, there was the loophole of disguising the lease as a mere licence to occupy, which was effectively closed off by the House of Lords in Street v. Mountford [1985] A.C. 809. It is perhaps surprising that although security of tenure was first introduced as long ago as 1920, landlords are still able to come up with new devices in the attempt to ensure that they can regain possession of their property whenever they wish. One such device was the recent subject of consideration by the Court of Appeal in Bankway Properties Ltd. v. Pensfold-Dunsford [2001] 1 W.L.R. 1369.

Type
Case and Comment
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge Law Journal and Contributors 2001

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)