31 Comparison with the right of removal under the Agricultural Holdings Act 1986The Agricultural Tenancies Act 1995 is more favourable to tenants than the Agricultural Holdings Act 19861 because:31.1 there is no pre-condition that the tenant must have complied with the terms and conditions of the tenancy and paid all the rent due and owing before he can exercise his right of removal2;31.2 the right of removal is at any time during or after the currency of the tenancy whilst ‘he remains in possession as tenant’3 with no obligation to serve notice
The Agricultural Tenancies Act 1995 is more favourable to tenants than the Agricultural Holdings Act 19861 because:
there is no pre-condition that the tenant must have complied with the terms and conditions of the tenancy and paid all the rent due and owing before he can exercise his right of removal2;
the right of removal is at any time during or after the currency of the tenancy whilst ‘he remains in possession as tenant’3 with no obligation to serve notice
**Trials are provided to all LexisPSL and LexisLibrary content, excluding Practice Compliance, Practice Management and Risk and Compliance, subscription packages are tailored to your specific needs. To discuss trialling these LexisPSL services please email customer service via our online form. Free trials are only available to individuals based in the UK. We may terminate this trial at any time or decide not to give a trial, for any reason. Trial includes one question to LexisAsk during the length of the trial.
0330 161 1234