Tenancy for two years or more — Joint application to minister in writing — Lease backdated — Whether statutory terms complied with — Appeal by landlord allowed
The plaintiff, P, was the owner of Lower Farm, Hillfield, Dorset. The farm had originally been owned by C and farmed in partnership with the defendant, T. On C’s death in 1984, P intended that her son, then aged 16 years, should take it over five years later at the age of 21. In order to grant T a tenancy without security, the Minister of Agriculture was written to and a response received in September 1984. His letter, of September 28, referred to the “tenancy to be granted after the date hereof” for more than two and less than five years. The parties negotiated an agreement which was stated to have begun on October 1 1984 and was due to end on September 30 1989. However, the agreement was executed only at the end of November 1984 and was backdated to October 1. It contained the endorsement complying with the requirements of section 5(3) of the Agricultural Holdings Act 1986 stating that section 3 of the Act would not apply. At the end of the term, T remained in occupation and, in October 1989, P issued proceedings to recover possession. P contended that T had no security of tenure and that all the conditions of section 5 had been met. T’s case was that the tenancy did not commence on October 1 but at the end of November and therefore was not within the section: see also Keen v Holland (1984) 269 EG 1043. At first instance the judge found in T’s favour. P appealed. Section 3(1) of the Agricultural Holdings Act 1986 provides that “a tenancy of an agricultural holding for a term of two years or more shall … continue … as a tenancy from year to year … unless–(a) not less than one year nor more than two years before the term date a written notice has been given … to terminate …”. By section 5(2), “Where before the grant of a tenancy of an agricultural holding for a term of not less than two, and not more than five years–(a) … the landlord and the tenant … agree that section 3 above shall not apply to the tenancy, and (b) those persons make a joint application in writing to the Minister for his approval of that agreement, and (c) the Minister notifies them of his approval, section 3 shall not apply to the tenancy if it satisfies the requirements of subsection (3) below. (3) … if the contract of tenancy is in writing and it … indicates… that section 3 does not apply to the tenancy.”
Held The appeal was allowed by a majority, Dillon LJ dissenting.
1. The term had started at the end of November when the lease was granted and ran until September 30 1989 so that on the face of it section 5(2)(b) was satisfied, as were all the conditions imposed by the statute.
2. On the construction of the minister’s consent there was no requirement that the term had to begin on October 1; if he had wanted the tenancy so to begin on that date, he would have stated so. There was nothing in the statute or in Keen to make such a construction any different.
Michael Barnes QC and John Grove (instructed by Batten & Co, of Yeovil) appeared for the appellant; and Joanne Moss (instructed by Porter Bartlett & Mayo, of Yeovil) appeared for the respondent.
