arrangement where two or more shared accommodation – joint tenancy lease occupancy 1 person renting property factually different than – manifests in nature of lease – 1 or 2 people renting? Boarding room – occupy as lodger – licence – exclusive possession shifts pendulum in terms of who has control – lies with tenant – lease- tenancy – licence- lies with landlord – problem – street v mountford – factual matrix Sole occupancy – single man room in large house – converted into bedsets – cook in own room, shares bathroom with others. Housekeeper cleans room on daily basis – occupier says worried about how much will be charged by landlord. Registers rent to protect rent – only applies to tenancies not licence Landlord not happy tells he can only stay but has to leave up until period he has paid for. Does he have lease or licence? Debted to Lord Denning test for occupancy – licensee Does not depend on if exclusive possession or not – but today Street v Mountford – questionable- not conclusive factor- all factors or circumstances, refined by street v mountford Stake in room result right but reasoning wrong – changed street v mountford – not helpful, some element of ownership rather than exclusive possession – exclusive occupation suggests element What you occupy, you do not possess* do not have element of ownership – licensee correct but reasoning incorrect – point of law cleared up in street v mountford – lodger or occupier term rent Occupier – lodger or licensee – unrestricted access/discretion/able to exercise control by landlords or servants – HL rebuts Denning’s stake in room
Terminology correct – portray correct message, exclusive possession not same as exclusive occupation – shared accommodation # of instances more than 1 person living in property w/ single person easy to say 1 person in 3 room house landlord will introduce new people landlord retains possession But two or more people presenting self to landlord – want to live in – landlord cannot choose Shams – landlords telling licensee but look at all aspects of parties – lease – parties expected and what they have different – street v mountford – lord templeman – I do not care that we do not care courts do not care what landlord cals it courts will go above and look at substance of agreement factual matrix requirements highlighted earlier Landlords probably – politicians or journalists – try to avoid or get around obligations of housing or rent acts – leases cost money for landlords – bureaucracy – de factor situation – legal position – looking for exclusive possession not exclusive occupation Crancour v Da Siwasa – not licence, sham. Lease does not reflect realities Westminster CC v Jones – shelter for homeless met building sharing common feature tenancy Jones can not be removed courts sorry but licensee Shared accommodation – different – factual matrix – HL look at nature of property and parties intentions – here look for how have parties acquired lease
You've reached the end of your free preview.
Want to read all 13 pages?