Palmer v McNamara
Palmer v McNamara
- 1991
- Estates Gazette (1991) 17 EG 88-92(3) .
CA 23 November 1990. The dispute, in which the court of appeal upheld a county court decision, arose over whether the landlord could be defined as " resident " or not, according to the Rent Act 1977 s12 , in the light of his occupation of a rear ground floor room in the building concerned. If occupation constituted residency, then the defendant tenant was not entitled to certain benefits granted by the Act. In support of his submission, the defendant argued that the landlord could not be described as resident as he did not possess a cooker and did not sleep in the room. However, these arguments were rejected and the outcome hinged rather on whether or not the landlord occupied another " dwelling house " in the same building at the commencement of the tenancy, and at all times since. The landlord had, and the court found in his favour.
POSSESSION
RESIDENT LANDLORDS
PROPERTY-RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY-RESIDENTIAL LANDLORD AND TENANT-RESIDENTIAL TENANCIES
CA 23 November 1990. The dispute, in which the court of appeal upheld a county court decision, arose over whether the landlord could be defined as " resident " or not, according to the Rent Act 1977 s12 , in the light of his occupation of a rear ground floor room in the building concerned. If occupation constituted residency, then the defendant tenant was not entitled to certain benefits granted by the Act. In support of his submission, the defendant argued that the landlord could not be described as resident as he did not possess a cooker and did not sleep in the room. However, these arguments were rejected and the outcome hinged rather on whether or not the landlord occupied another " dwelling house " in the same building at the commencement of the tenancy, and at all times since. The landlord had, and the court found in his favour.
POSSESSION
RESIDENT LANDLORDS
PROPERTY-RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY-RESIDENTIAL LANDLORD AND TENANT-RESIDENTIAL TENANCIES