000			01500cab a2200193 4500
001			ABS40490
008			090401t1989 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u24263
041			_aeng
245			_aWebb v Barnet LBC
260			_c1989
350			_a0
490			_aEstates Gazette _v(1989) 11 EG 80-87(4)
520			_aCA 13 December 1988. Appeal by tenants (W) from cc decision refusing a declaration that they were secure tenants of a dwelling house under Housing Act 1985 s79(1) and had a right to buy the freehold under s118(1). The cc held that at the date of the grant of the lease, 17 September 1965, the subject house was not "let as a separate dwelling" within s79(1). W appealed. In 1965 the house was let expressly for mixed residential and business use, there being a covenant in the lease. W submitted that the phrase "let as a separate dwelling" covered a mixed residential and business tenancy. CA rejected his submission. Under the earlier statutes there was no specific protection for business tenancies and a tenancy for mixed residential and business use did not lose the protection of the Rent Acts by reason of the business factor. The position now was different, as explained in Cheryl Investments Ltd v Saldanha and applied in Henry Smith`s Trustees Charity v Wagle (See Abstract ). Therefore,
650			_aPROPERTY-RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY-RESIDENTIAL LANDLORD AND TENANT-RESIDENTIAL TENANCIES
690			_aHOUSING-CASE LAW
942			_n0
948			_c04/03/1997
999			_c16260 _d16260