Limitation of Actions Consultation - Law Commission

a third party who has dispossessed the tenant. 25
The question of when the tenancy
is terminated will, in general, be decided according to the relevant principles of
landlord and tenant law. 26
6.14 Where the action is to recover land which is subject to a yearly or other periodic
tenancy and there is no lease in writing, the determination of the tenancy, and
therefore the accrual of the landlord’s right of action, will be deemed to take place
at the end of the period of the tenancy, 27
or, where rent is received in respect of the
tenancy after this date, on the date of the last receipt of rent. 28
The meaning of
“lease in writing” was examined in Long v Tower Hamlets Borough Council. 29
Here
the tenant took possession of the premises after endorsing a copy of a letter to him
from the Council setting out the terms of the tenancy agreement. It was held that
this was evidence of the tenancy rather than a “lease in writing”. To qualify, the
document would have to create a leasehold interest in the land, being executed as
a deed or fulfilling the requirements of section 54(2) of the Law of Property Act
1925. 30
6.15 Sometimes when a lease comes to an end, and the tenant holds over by remaining
in possession, a new tenancy will come into effect, either by common law, or by
the operation of statutes intended to give the tenant security of tenure. Where a
new tenancy comes into existence at common law, simply by virtue of the landlord
receiving rent, the nature of that tenancy will depend on the intention of the
parties. 31
If a periodic tenancy is created, section 15(2) of the 1980 Act will apply. 32
Where statute intervenes, the position is less clear cut. In Jessamine Investment Co
Ltd v Schwartz 33
the Court of Appeal held that section 15(2) was capable of
applying to a statutory tenancy under the Rent Act 1968 (although Megaw LJ
expressed some doubt). But in the case, for example, of a business tenancy with a
fixed contractual term which is continuing by virtue of section 24 of the Landlord
and Tenant Act 1954, it would seem unlikely that section 15(2) would apply. 34
25 See paras 6.37 - 6.39 below in relation to situations where a squatter has dispossessed the
tenant.
26 See, eg, Woodfall: Landlord and Tenant, ch 17. See para 6.15 below in relation to “holding
over”.
27 Schedule 1, para 5(1).
28 Schedule 1, para 5(2).
29 [1996] 3 WLR 317.
30 See also Moses v Lovegrove [1952] 2 QB 533, in which the Court of Appeal held that a rent
book did not amount to a lease in writing.
31 Javad v Mohammed Aqil [1991] 1 WLR 1007 (CA).
32 See para 6.13 above. See para 6.17 below in relation to the position where a tenancy at will
is created.
33 [1978] 1 QB 264.
34 But see P Walter and J Harris, Claims to the Possession of Land: The Law and Practice (3rd ed
1997), p 617. Suppose that L grants T a lease in writing for 3 years from 1996, to which
Part II of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 applies. The contractual term expires in 1999,
but the tenancy continues by virtue of s 24 of the 1954 Act. It would appear that time
would not run against the landlord until the continuation tenancy was terminated in
accordance with the 1954 Act, even if, for example, T stopped paying rent in 2000. If, on
97