Claim for possession of land — Appeal against County Court Judge’s decision — Finding that there was not a tenancy — Agricultural Holdings Act, 1948 — Question of exclusive possession — Plaintiff was in paramount occupation — Appeal dismissed
The Court dismissed this appeal by Mr William Reginald King, of Petty’s Farm, Yetminster, Dorset, against the judgment of Judge Armstrong, at Yeovil County Court, granting to Mr Arthur George Wyatt, tenant of the White Hart Inn, Yetminster, possession of an orchard adjoining the inn.
Mr Gilbert Dare (instructed by Messrs Marsh, Warry & Arrow, of Yeovil) appeared for the appellant; Mr Donald McIntyre (instructed by Messrs Boxall, Porter & Mangnall, of Yeovil) represented the respondent.
Mr Dare said that the Judge held that Mr King was not a tenant, and that Section 2 of the Agricultural Holdings Act, 1948, did not apply, because he had not exclusive possession of the orchard. Counsel submitted that Mr King was a tenant, and that, even if he was not a tenant, he was a licensee of the grazing rights.
Lord Justice Somervell, giving judgment, said that it was common ground that, if Mr King was a tenant or a licensee, the necessary procedure for Mr Wyatt to regain possession of the land had not been complied with. The Court had to consider |page:125| the case on the basis that this was an orchard, and Mr Dare had to show that the Judge was wrong in law. “On such facts as have been found,” said his Lordship, “I am not satisfied that this is a case in which we can reverse the Judge’s conclusion on what is, prima facie, a question of fact.”
Lord Justice Singleton agreed.
Lord Justice Denning, who also agreed that the appeal should be dismissed, said that he thought it failed on the ground that there was not a licence to occupy the land, but one to take and use the produce of the land. The innkeeper was in paramount occupation of the land, and he allowed a neighbouring farmer to take the cider apples and graze beasts in the orchard.
The appeal was dismissed, with costs.
