CA 29 June 1995. Appellant tenant (A) rented two parcels of land from respondent landlord (C) on an annual tenancy agreement. At the 1982 and 1985 rent reviews, A agreed to pay a single aggregate rent for both pieces of land. The landlord`s record was amended to show one parcel of land without informing the tenant. In 1989, the tenant entered into a management agreement with the Nature Conservancy Council following the land`s designation as a Site of Special Scientific Interest. At CC proceedings to determine the statement of case by appointed arbitrator in connection with the 1990 rent review, it was stated that the rent was to be fixed on the basis of one holding and that the marriage value of the holding with the other land was a relevant consideration. On appeal, the 1982 and 1985 rental agreements were deemed not to be surrenders of previous tenancies with original agreements remaining in force. Marriage value is considered as a relevant factor under Agricultural Holdings Act 19