Saracens Blog

Can you exclude the security of tenure provisions for business tenants under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 without a court order?

Under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 security of tenure has been afforded to business tenants so that a lease of commercial premises does not come to an end on the expiry of the contractual term. It continues until terminated in accordance with the provisions of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954.

The effect of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 can now be excluded by agreement between the parties provided certain statutory requirements are met.

Prior to the amendments to the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 which came into force on 1 June 2004 when a new section 38A was inserted into the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, it was necessary for the parties to apply to the court for an order authorising an agreement that excluded the security of tenure provisions in the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, subject to section 38(4) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 (now repealed). An agreement purporting to exclude the operation of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 would otherwise be void by virtue of section 38 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954.

The new section 38A amendment to the Landlord and Tenant Act introduced in 2004 now makes it possible to exclude the provisions of sections 24 to 28 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 without a court order.

The agreement to exclude the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 must be preceded by the service of a notice in a prescribed form and the tenant must also make a statutory declaration in the prescribed form before entering into the tenancy.

Tags: , , ,


One Response to “Can you exclude the security of tenure provisions for business tenants under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 without a court order?”
  1. 06.28.2012

    I know it’s only a34 or so to do a Land Registry search but why shuold Tessa incur even this modest cost without a client to bill it too?I suppose she could scan it and e-mail it to the Council Tax section for the area where the property is situated with a brief note asking that they forward it to the landlord if they have his address. Then again, if the landlord is a client of Tessa’s (I suppose an existing client might have remarried or otherwise be using a different name) or hopes to become a client then he/she might object to Tessa having informed the council about his business [for all I know the council own the property and it has been illegally sublet]. Might be best either to:-(a) stick it in the bin (or find somewhere to file it away) or,(b) post copies back to the tenant and the landlord (c/o the property) saying that she isn’t sure why she has been sent it and saying she’d be grateful for a telephone call to help clarify things. [Yep, it would probably be cheaper to spend the a34 on the Land Registry search!]


Leave a Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

 
The Law Society Excellence Awards 2013 Shortlisted logo The Law Society Excellence Awards 2015 Shortlisted logo

Connect with us

Blog Archive

Browse by Date:

See results


Request a call back






captcha
css.php