Mikeover Ltd v Brady

Mikeover Ltd v Brady
Court	Court of Appeal
Citation(s)	[1989] 3 All ER 618, (1990) 59 P&CR 218
Keywords
Lease

Mikeover Ltd v Brady [1989] 3 All ER 618 is an English land law case, concerning the definition of leases.

Facts

Mikeover Ltd had leased 179 Southgate Rd, London, N1, and then let it out to Mr Brady and Miss Guile. They each signed separate but identical ‘licence’ agreements allowing them to share for six months for £86.66 a month. After the sixth months expired they were allowed to remain on the same terms. Miss Guile moved out early 1986, telling Mr Ferster, the Mikeover Ltd director, in April 1986. Mr Brady offered to continue to pay £173.32 in rent. Mr Ferster replied ‘I can’t accept it. I’ll hold you responsible for your share only.’ But Mr Brady still fell into arrears for his half, and Mikeover Ltd tried to remove him in early 1987. He claimed he had a lease of the flat to get Rent Act protection.

County Court held they had only licences.

Judgment

Slade LJ held they had only licences. There was exclusive possession in common with the other occupier, but there was no unity of interest, and no joint tenancy, and payments were incapable of creating a joint tenancy because the obligations were not joint. There was no sham. It was established that there must be the four unities present, of possession, interest, title and time, and there was no unity of interest because there was only a several obligation for payment of the rent. That requires the existence of ‘joint rights and joint obligations’.

Sources on leases

LRA 2002 s 116 and Sch 3, para 1

Protection from Eviction Act 1977 s 5

Family Law Act 1996 ss 30-33

LPA 1925 ss 1 and 205(1)(xvii)

Errington v Errington [1951] EWCA Civ 2

Ashburn Anstalt v Arnold [1988] EWCA Civ 14

Street v Mountford [1985] UKHL 4

Mikeover v Brady [1989] EWCA Civ 1

Aslan v Murphy and Duke v Wynne [1989] EWCA Civ 2

AG Securities v Vaughan [1988] UKHL 8

Prudential Ltd v London Residuary Body [1991] UKHL 10

Bruton v London & Quadrant Housing Trust [1999] UKHL 26

ECHR art 8 and Prot 1, art 1

Kay v Lambeth LBC [2006] UKHL 10

see English land law, licenses and leases

Notes

References

Sparkes, ‘Co-Tenants, Joint Tenants and Tenants in Common’ (1989) 18 AALR 151, 155, not clear why there is a requirement for a genuine joint tenancy, when there is no such requirement for having a freehold together.

External links

This article is issued from Wikipedia - version of the 4/2/2015. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike but additional terms may apply for the media files.