Archive for May 2006
Section 2 of the Protection from Eviction Act 1977 provides that the act gives protection to premises let “as a dwelling”. The Court of Appeal held that this phrase meant properties that a let wholly or partly as a dwelling. In this case the property was a mixed business and residential use and the tenant was therefore protected from an unlawful eviction from the residential part of the building.
The House of Lords held that in order to satisfy the definition of “town or village green” in the Common Registrations Act 1965 it was necessary for the inhabitants of that locality to “continue” to use the land for sports and pastimes for a period of 20 years until the date of application for registration.
For a long time housing law has been bedeviled by a concept known as ‘the tolerated trespasser’ which occurs when a tenant who has had a suspended possession order made against him, breaches the terms of the order but is allowed to stay in occupation.
A suspended possession order is where a possession order is made [...]
The Court of Appeal held that the tenant was not entitled to purchase the freehold of a property. The judge had erred in holding that the subject property had no rateable value. In fact the property consisted of two cottages and had a rateable value of the two cottages. The rent was £100 and this was not less than 2/3 of the rateable value of £158. The low rent test of the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 had not been satisfied.