Weekly oral tenancy — Non-payment of rent — Whether tenant in adverse possession as trespasser — Whether tenant’s right to tender payment of rent continuing — Whether tenant acknowledging landlord’s paper title — Whether landlord statute-barred from re-entry — First instance decision in tenant’s favour — Landlord’s appeal dismissed
The defendant’s late husband, Mr H, was the tenant of Toll House, Carmarthen, Dyfed, and his estate vested in the defendant, Mrs H, on his death in 1988. From 1967 H and his wife had furnished and used Toll House as a second home. The tenancy had been a weekly oral tenancy at a rent of 40p per week, paid every six months. All keys were either in H’s possession or held by their order. The paper title devolved on the plaintiff through the death of the previous freeholders and the last time H paid rent was in June 1971. Thereafter, H remained in occupation and continued to use Toll House as before but ceased to pay rent because he was uncertain who the rent should be paid to; although he endeavoured to establish the freeholders identity in correspondence with the solicitors concerned in the dispute over the freehold title on behalf of P. By section 29 of the Limitation Act 1980, if the person in possession of land acknowledged the title to whom the right of action accrued, that right should be treated as having accrued on the date of acknowledgement. At first instance, the judge found that: from the date of the last receipt of rent, Mr and Mrs H were in adverse possession; there had been no agreement to vary H’s tenancy; H had not acknowledged P’s title; and therefore P’s claim failed. P appealed.
Held The appeal was dismissed.
1. The effect of the 1980 Act was that Mrs H was not required to establish that the true owner had been dispossessed. Further, a weekly tenancy constituted a “tenancy from year to year or other period” within para 5(1) of Schedule 1 to the Act: Jessamine Investment Co v Schwartz [1978] QB 264.
2. In the case of an informal weekly tenancy, the reversioner’s cause of action for the recovery of possession from his tenant accrued on the date on which the first period of the tenancy ended or, if rent was received thereafter, the date of the last receipt of rent. A tenant who remained in occupation without paying rent was treated, though only for the purposes of the Act, to be in possession as a trespasser notwithstanding the continued existence of the tenant’s right to tender payment of the rent and remain in possession as a tenant and the reversioners’s right to demand payment of the rent at any time: Moses v Lovegrove [1952] 2 QB 533.
3. Accordingly, the right of action in this case accrued in June 1971 and the reversioner’s title was extinguished 12 years later unless in the meantime H made a written and signed acknowledgement of the reversioner’s title or to his agent so as to satisfy sections 29 and 30 of the 1980 Act.
4. The judge found there had been no agreement to vary the terms of the tenancy. But even if there had been it would not have prevented the reversioner’s right of action from accruing at the date of the last payment of rent. H had a weekly tenancy and was entitled to remain in possession and to tender the rent at any time if he had wished to do so. Similarly, the landlord could have demanded rent, together with arrears, at any time.
Robert Blackford (instructed by Gwilym Richards & Co, of Newcastle Emlyn) appeared for the plaintiff; Stephen Pritchett (instructed by Halsalls) appeared for the defendant.
