澳门六合彩资料

Skip to main content
Share via Copy link

Windsor-Clive, Earl of Plymouth and others v Rees and another [2019] EWHC 1008 (Ch)

A widely drafted landlord鈥檚 reservation of a right of entry was given a narrow interpretation by the court.

03 July 2019

Facts

A farm was let under two agricultural tenancy agreements dating back to the 1960s. 

In one of the tenancy agreements, a right was reserved for the landlord (L) as follows:

鈥淩ight for the Landlord鈥︹o enter on any part of the Farm lands and premises at all reasonable times for all reasonable purposes."

In the other tenancy agreement, a right was reserved for L as follows:

鈥渢he Landlord may at any time and at all times during the said tenancy enter upon the said premises鈥..for the purpose of inspecting the same or for making roads sewers or drains or for any other purpose connected with his estate.鈥

The farm was part of a site intended for a new garden city outside of Cardiff and applications for outline planning permission had been made for an area including the farm.

L applied for an injunction preventing the tenant (T) from interfering with L鈥檚 rights of access. L wanted to undertake a number of surveys from the farm, including a bat habitat survey.

Issue

Did the widely worded reservations in the two tenancy agreements allow for wide rights of access for surveys, inspections and investigations related to the proposed redevelopment of the land?

Decision

The phrase 鈥渁ll reasonable purposes鈥 in the first reservation had to be interpreted in the context of a landlord and tenant relationship and did not extend to all reasonable purposes that a landlord may have in mind. It should be construed as a right of entry for inspection and observation purposes, but did not extend to activities which could cause damage to the land or involve cordoning off part of the land or significant interference with the operation of the farm. Digging excavations, sinking boreholes and erecting structures all fell outside of the scope of the reservation.

Similarly, the second reservation did not provide a wider right for L. In particular, the phrase 鈥渇or any other purpose connected with his estate鈥 referred to activities to be carried out on L鈥檚 adjoining land.

Points to note/consider

  1. Similar reservations to those used in the two tenancy agreements here are fairly typical of agricultural tenancies (particular older ones that pre-date the Agricultural Tenancies Act 1995) and this case could well be cited as a precedent in the future by farming tenants who want to make life awkward for a prospective developer.
  2. This case is a useful illustration of how a court will interpret a landlord鈥檚 reservation in a lease. In particular, a court will strive to preserve the validity of an exception or reservation but will interpret it as restrictively as is necessary to avoid a derogation from grant or a breach of the covenant for quiet enjoyment. If it is not possible to construe an exception or reservation in a manner consistent with this 鈥榠rreducible minimum鈥, it will be struck down. In particular, a widely drafted landlord鈥檚 exception or reservation will not give a landlord 鈥榗arte blanche鈥 to ride roughshod over a tenant鈥檚 rights. 

Contact

Contact

David Harris

Professional Development Lawyer

david.harris@brownejacobson.com

+44 (0)115 934 2019

View profile
Can we help you? Contact David

Related expertise

You may be interested in...