Licences and tenancies at will

A licence generally permits someone to do something on another’s property which would otherwise be unlawful. Licences do not generally benefit from the same level of statutory protection that many leases do (such as security of tenure or compensation for improvements).

A tenancy at will is a tenancy which is terminable at the will of either the landlord or the tenant. They are flexible but do not provide either party with any certainty or security.

Licences and tenancies at will are often seen as a way to allow occupation and use of premises on an ‘easy in, easy out’ basis without the need to follow complex statutory procedures.

Types of licence

Licences can be divided into three categories:

  1. a bare licence

  2. a licence coupled with the grant of an interest

  3. a contractual licence

Licences can be expressly created or arise by implication.

For further details on the nature of licences, see Practice Note: Leases and licences

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Property News

Market value, distributions and notional transactions—key SDLT lessons from Tower One St George Wharf Ltd v HMRC

Tax analysis: In Tower One St George Wharf Ltd v HMRC, the Court of Appeal considered the basis on which stamp duty land tax (SDLT) should be assessed and whether that resulted in SDLT being paid on the market value, the actual consideration paid, or on some other basis for a complex transaction within a corporate group. The taxpayer argued that the ‘Case 3’ exception under section 54(4) of the Finance Act 2003 (FA 2003) applied, which would result in SDLT being charged on the actual consideration. HMRC argued that the exception did not apply, which would result in SDLT being paid on the market value of the property. Alternatively, HMRC argued that if the exception did apply then the anti-avoidance provisions at section 75A FA 2003 applied, potentially resulting in an even higher SDLT charge. The Court of Appeal held that although the Case 3 exception applied, the anti-avoidance provision in FA 2003, s 75A also applied. This resulted in SDLT being assessed on an aggregate amount that was even higher than the property's market value (although HMRC did not seek to increase its assessment beyond market value). Therefore, the appeal was dismissed. As explained by Jon Stevens, partner, and Rory Clarke, solicitor, at DWF Law LLP, this decision deals with the interaction of a number of complex SDLT provisions and clarifies the SDLT provisions relating to transfers to connected companies and the SDLT anti-avoidance provisions, with implications for corporate structuring and tax planning.

View Property by content type :

Popular documents