Continuing alone
Language: English Series: Estates Gazette ; (9902) 22 May 1999, 155(1)Publication details: 1999Subject(s): Summary: Discusses de Rothschild v Bell in which it was decided that a tenant was entitled to remain in possession of a property under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 part I, despite being only one of two joint tenants. It was held that the Act conferred protection on 'persons rather than legal concepts'. It was also held that unlike a statutory tenancy, a continuation tenancy is a property interest and may therefore vest in a trustee in bankruptcy.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| News article | London News article | WB3520-27 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 93548-1001 |
Discusses de Rothschild v Bell in which it was decided that a tenant was entitled to remain in possession of a property under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 part I, despite being only one of two joint tenants. It was held that the Act conferred protection on 'persons rather than legal concepts'. It was also held that unlike a statutory tenancy, a continuation tenancy is a property interest and may therefore vest in a trustee in bankruptcy.