000			01462cab a2200181 4500
001			ABS40629
008			090401t1989 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u25122
041			_aeng
245			_aLester and another v Ridd
260			_c1989
350			_a0
490			_aAll England Law Reports _v(1989) 1 All ER 1111-1119(10)
520			_aCA 20 December 1988. By a lease dated 1902 the landlords predecessor in title leased a house and 23 acres to L, the tenants for 99 years at a yearly rent of £9. In 1955 the premises were assigned for the rest of the term to a father and son who farmed in partnership until 1963. By a deed of partition dated 1963 the lease of the house and 2 acres of land was assigned to the father (R) for the unexpired residue at a rent of £5 while the rest of the land went to the son at £4. In 1982 the appellants purchased the leasehold interest but it was not until the assignment that the landlord heard of the deed of partition. In 1985 R gave notice of their desire to buy the freehold and when the landlord refused to sell they sought a declaration of entitlement under Leasehold Reform Act 1967. The judge dismissed the application on the grounds that R were not entitled to acquire the freehold as the house was `comprised in an agricultural holding ` due to the sons continuing to farm the residue of
690			_aLANDLORD AND TENANT-CASE LAW-AGRICULTURAL TENANCIES
942			_n0
948			_c04/03/1997
999			_c16851 _d16851