Erimus Housing Limited v Barclays Wealth Trustees (Jersey) Limited [2014] EWCA Civ. 303
The Court of Appeal has reversed the decision of the Chancery Division and held that Erimus Housing Limited did not become an annual tenant when it held over after the expiry of a contracted-out fixed term tenancy during negotiations for a new lease. The Deputy Judge of the Chancery Division held that the negotiations were “desultory” and “sporadic” and therefore that this was not a case where the parties were in the “throes of negotiation”, which was the sort of case described by Nicholls LJ in Javad v Aqil [1991] 1 WLR 1007 as a case where the appropriate inference to draw from the payment and acceptance of rent was a tenancy at will. The Court of Appeal disagreed, holding that the occupation of Erimus was always against the backdrop of a negotiation for a new lease and therefore it was inappropriate to draw the inference that the parties intended, at any point before Erimus vacated, that Erimus should become an annual tenant, subject to the protection of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954. Adam Rosenthal acted for the successful appellant.
Back to news listing
