Logged out
Access All our Essays in an Instant
Swap your work for FREE access, or pay £4.99 for instant access
Why has the House of Lords' attempt in Street-v-Mountford to restore a clear distinction between a
Member rating:
(1 vote)
| Words:
| Submitted: Mon Jun 19 2006
Page Preview
On the left is an image preview of every page of this document, and below are the first 150 words with formatting removed:
Why has the House of Lords' attempt in Street-v-Mountford to restore a clear distinction between a To suggest that Lord Templeman attempted to restore a clear distinction between a licence and a lease is misleading. He did however achieved an agglomeration of current case law, mainly that of Lord Denning, but more importantly his judgment must be seen in the political and social context of the day. Gray suggests that the decline in the housing stock in the rented sector had stifled judicial intervention into superficial licences before 1985. Doling had even suggested that the Rent Acts were no longer relevant. It was therefore clear that, because of dwindling housing stock, landlords could place a premium on whatever stock they had. It was perhaps because of this and dubious decisions referred to by Lord Templeman in the Court of Appeal that led him to overturn the contract approach taken by the...
Get instant access
- Instant, unlimited access to our documents in full
- Swap your work for free access, or pay £4.99
- To see the full version of this document and 150,159 others
