4 essentials of a lease
parties
property
rent
duration
compare a lease and a license
lease= grants exclusive possession of property for a fixed period of time. Creates a proprietary interest (in estate in land)
they are generally transferrable
whereas…
licence= grants permission to occupy or use property without exclusive possession, creates only a personal right
limited protection; revocable, unless contractually restricted
according to Duke of Buccleuch v Magistrates of Edinburgh, what is the legal status of a structure such as a portico, build projecting beyond a property’s feu boundary line?
the structure constitutes an encroachment as the owner does not possess real rights over the ground beyond the original boundary
the court’s decision was that the trustees did not own the projected area, as their rights were limited by the feu boundary, making the projection an encroachment
what is the legal distinction between conventional separate tenement, and a legal separate tenement? in Scots Property law?
conventional tenements are created by conveyance,
whilst
the legal tenements are part of the regalia minora, and are granted by the Crown
legal separate tenements- all part of the regalia Minora
granted by the crown or remaining with the crown except for coal, which is vested in the coal authority
right to fish for salmon
right to gather mussels and oysters
gold and silver mines
right to extract petroleum and natural gas
coal
surface proprietor will be compensated for withdrawal of support by Coal Mining Coal industry Act 1994
boundary and fence walls - type 1
entirely on one side of boundary
boundary and fence- type 2
straddles on the boundary
construction of type 2 requires consent of both land owners or its encroachment
boundary and fence boundaries in either case
ownership of the wall goes with ownership of the land
construction of type 2 requires consent of both land owners or its encroachment
common interests in maintenance of type 2 (interest extends to the whole wall)
Hedges over 2m tall which obtstruct light:
encroachment
this is an interference with the owner’s right of exclusive possession, generally building beyond the extent of the boundary
Duke of Buccleuch v Magistrates of Edinburgh (1865) 3 M 528
Edinburgh
Buccleuch= Bobbi Brown on George Street
facts~ trustees of the assembly rooms built a portico projecting beyond their fue line on George Street
issue~ did they have real rights over the ground beyond the feu line?
held~ no- the court held that the trustee’s didn’t’ own the projected area, the feu plan and charter didn’t grant rights beyond the original boundary
prospective building can be interdicted
existing building can be made subject to a removal order
aemulatio vicini
abuse of right
lawful but malicious use of land to spite neighbour
“under-developed and marginalised” - Gloag and Henderson
pursuer must show malice, defence that the operation carried out for own convenience
Access for Repairs: TC(S)A 2004- s 17
Hume- suggests that slight and temporary inconvenience e.g. ladders or scaffolding may arise out of necessity
Soulsby v Jones
nuisance
physical damage or interference with enjoyment and use of land
which is plus quam tolerabile (more than reasonably tolerable) in circumstances tested objectively
fault (culpa) must be proven
RHM Bakeries v Strathclude Regional Council 1985 SC(HL) 17
case law=
Bakeries sued the council after floodign damaged their bakery, alleging negligence in maintaining a sewar
issue-whether the council owed a duty of care and whether the flooding was caused by their failure
held~ the court found no liability, the damage was due to exceptional rainfall, not negligence, the council was not held responsible
house owned by Mr Banks, back garden is surrounded by a river,
the other side bought by Miss Smith,
Mr Banks has friends over who fish in the river for trout, the cottage has traditional stone walls separating the garden from the neighbours, one of the boundary walls is in state of repaid,
the Banks’s would like the wall to be repaired, then would like the trellises to grow climbing roses
Questions:
what would your advice be if Miss Smith would want to fish (might your answer be different if she wanted to fish for salmon?)
1- Miss Fish may fish for trout, as it is a public right in non-tidal rivers unless expressly prohibited)
therefore Miss S may fish for trout unless Mr Banks can prove this exclusive rights
if this were salmon however, Miss S would require permission as this is part of the regalia minora
what expanded the community right to buy, previously applicable only to rural land, to cover urban areas as well?
the community Empowerment (S) Act 2015
what legal principle regarding the essentials of a lease was established in Mann v Houston?
Rent must be a periodical payment for a valid lease to exist- a one off premium is insufficient
Mann v Houston
Facts~ concerned the nature of rent in a lease agreement, in this case 10 years in exchange for one off premium at the start of the tenancy
held~ there was no lease and the third party were not bound to honour it as it was a contractual arrangement only
Gray v University of Edinburgh
facts~ dispute over contract where all terms agreed except duration
held~ the court found a valid contract, agreement on essential terms was sufficient even without duration- the court found that there was a lease for a year, and after that the lease would continue otherwise they could re-negotiate or end it
Gyle Shopping Centre
M&S were anchor tenants (bring customers in) confirmed that exclusive lease could effectively include a shared right over a neighbouring properties (pro-indivisio shares)
issue~ dispute over land lord to re-develop a car park to allow Primark to move in
Held~ their right was part of a real right of lease, and therefore M&S did not have to burry their lease, the lease gave them shared possession, not just for access, meaning that they had stronger rights to use those area, and the landlord had to respect that
Shetland Islands Council v BP Petroleum Developments - Shetland- have to imply what she is saying cause you cant understand her
agreement on essentials other than rent
held~ the court implied a market rent
how does the legal remedy of irritancy differ from rescission in the context of a lease?
irritancy allows for automatic termination of the lease due to a specified breach, while rescission relieves both parties of future obligations following a material breach
assignation
transferring an entire interest and obligation to a new tenant
pre-emption right
gives the person holding it the opportunity to buy land should the owner decide to sell ti
–>The Land Owner has to offer it for sale to the community body before a third party, if they say no, their pre-emption right comes to an end and they can sell to the third party
the case of Ben Cleuch Estates Ltd v Scottish Enterprise, highlights a critical requirement when exercising a break clause in a lease what is this?
strict compliance with the formalities of the break clause, including correctly naming the legal entity or serving and receiving notice, is requireed