This question raises the issue of what can be done when an executed document fails to accurately reflect the agreement that the parties had reached. Where a tenant entered into a lease on the basis of a statement by the landlord’s agent that they would not be responsible for electricity charges at the property, other than through the service charge, but the lease mistakenly makes them liable for those charges, what can be done? Pre-contractual negotiations cannot be used as an aid to interpretation of a contract. The statement from the agent therefore cannot be admitted in evidence as

The stamp duty land tax (SDLT) rules that apply when a tenant holds over a lease are complex. In particular, the rules have been amended since SDLT was first introduced in 2003 and different rules can apply to particular scenarios with different results. The rules are contained in Schedule 17A to the Finance Act 2003 (FA 2003). The holding over period FA 2003, Sch 17A, para 3 applies to leases which continue after a fixed term. The tenant has an obligation to recalculate the SDLT due on the lease as if the lease was a fixed term lease for its original

An assignment of a lease in breach of covenant is nevertheless a valid assignment: Old Grovebury Manor Farm Ltd v W Seymour Plant Sales and Hire Ltd (No 2). Therefore, assuming the assignment has been registered (if required) the assignee is now the tenant. Note, that the assignor is likely to remain liable on the lease covenants despite

In order for a lease to be valid at law, it must be in writing and executed as a deed (section 52(1) of the Law of Property Act 1925 (LPA 1925)). LPA 1925, s 54(2) provides for certain exceptions, such as a lease for a term not exceeding three years, including periodic tenancies. In this scenario, given that the lease has been executed, it can be assumed that the lease falls within LPA 1925, s 52(1). By section 43 of the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006), a company may make a contract by writing under its common seal or a contract can be made on its behalf by a person acting under its authority, express or

In this scenario, it appears that a tenant has the benefit of a call option for the grant of a lease of land outside the current demise but various problems have arisen which will make it difficult or undesirable for the landlord to grant the new lease. For commentary in relation to call options generally, see Practice Note: Call options—land. In assessing

One of the ways in which a lease can come to an end is surrender by operation of law (sometimes called implied surrender). A surrender by operation of law will occur where a tenant takes a new lease from their landlord to begin during the term of the old lease. See Commentary: Surrender by operation of law: Hill and Redman's Law of Landlord and Tenant [4321]. A surrender by operation

The first thing to note is that although the tenant could have granted a sublease of the flat, keeping a reversionary interest expectant on the termination of the sublease, they did not do so. Had they done so, the terms of the lease in so far as they are related to the garage could have been varied by a deed if variation as, although there would be two registered leasehold titles, one would relate to the lease and one to the

The case of Lankester & Son v Rennie and another may assist. Here, the defendants entered into a lease with Lankester and, subsequently, moved out of the premises having found another company, TCA, who were to take an assignment of the lease. TCA began trading from the premises. The landlord accepted rent from TCA but no formal assignment was completed. Lankester then sought to recover arrears of rent from

The original term should be treated as having a term commencing on the date of the grant of the lease, ie nine and a half years. This is on the basis of the judgment in the High Court in Bradshaw v Pawley, in which Sir Robert Megarry V-C held (at 276 and 277): 'It is well settled that a lease cannot retrospectively vest an estate in the lessee. If today a lease is granted for seven years from this day a year ago, no term of seven years is brought into being, but only a term of six years from today…no

A company may grant a power of attorney, enabling an individual to execute any instrument (including a lease) with his own signature and do any other thing in his own name by the authority of the donor of the power (section 7 of the Powers of Attorney Act 1971). This means that an individual can enter into a lease including one by deed on behalf of a company utilising a power of attorney. It appears from this scenario that the company is the lessor, with the individual buyer being the lessee. A donee of a power of attorney may be restricted in terms of the

This question raises the pitfalls into which parties to a lease might unwittingly fall when the contractual term comes to an end but the tenant remains in possession to the extent that life almost carries on as normal. When a lease has the protection of Part II of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 (LTA 1954), there are certain restrictions upon how it can be brought to an end. Although such a tenancy can be brought to an end by surrender on the part of the tenant, any agreement into which the parties

It is not clear how, or between whom, the wayleave has arisen. However, assuming that the wayleave has been entered into with a utility company or a telecommunications operator under the relevant statutory powers/rights, this still does not alter the essential characteristic of a wayleave, namely that it is a type of contractual licence granted by a land owner to a utility company or a telecommunications operator permitting the