Chapter 7 Scenario questions

. Jacob is the freehold owner of an industrial unit that has been empty for some time save for some of his own personal possessions and a small office where he does his own paperwork. His niece, Keke, is keen to start up a new T-shirt printing business but could not afford the costs of entering a lease. Jacob says that Keke can share the unit with him until her business is 'up and running' at which point she can buy her own place. Keke agrees to give Jacob £100 per month and Jacob agrees, in return, to make sure the unit is kept clean, tidy, and in good repair. Which of the following statements most accurately reflects Keke's legal status here?

Keke is a tenant under a lease for which she pays rent and there is an evident landlord–tenant relationship on these facts.

Keke is a bare licensee as she has nothing more than a simple permission to be on Jacob's land.

Keke is a contractual licensee as she has permission enter and use Jacob's land springing from an agreement between the parties which satisfies the elements of a contract.

Keke has no rights in the unit as the 'agreement' with Jacob was not committed to writing.

. Luke enjoyed a written contractual licence to use part of his neighbour Mandy's land to store and park his collection of rare cars and vans. Without telling Luke, Mandy sold the part of her land subject to the contractual licence to Nina. Nina visited the land and, seeing Luke, told him to 'get out of here right now, you trespasser!' Nina has threatened to call the police. What is Luke's legal status here? Select one of the following statements.

As a contractual licensee, Luke has a proprietary interest that is binding on Nina. Nina cannot remove Luke from the land. Nina is bound by Luke's agreement with Mandy.

As a contractual licensee and in view of Nina's unreasonable behaviour, Luke's interest will be binding on Nina through the doctrine of estoppel.

As Luke's contractual licence was made in writing, it will be binding on Nina under the maxim 'equity sees as done that which ought to be done'.

As Luke is a contractual licensee which is a personal and non-proprietary interest, in the ordinary course, it cannot be enforceable against Nina. Nina can remove Luke from the land.

. Olaf owns the freehold of a building in which Pauline has been living and running a hair-dressing business under a contractual licence. Without discussing it with Pauline, Olaf sold the building to Quinn with the sale being conducted by an estate agent. The agent who gave Quinn a tour of the building told him that, 'you will be aware that Pauline is currently using the land and, on this basis, the purchase price is lower than it would normally be for such a great property'. Quinn has told Pauline to vacate the land. What is Pauline's status here? Select one of the following.

Pauline's contractual licence, despite being personal in nature, may be binding on Quinn under a constructive trust if it can be shown that Quinn's conscience is affected and that he undertook a new obligation to be bound by Pauline's interest.

Pauline's contractual licence, despite being personal in nature, may be binding on Quinn as a result of the estate agent's negligence.

Pauline's contractual licence, despite being personal in nature, may be binding on Quinn under the doctrine of estoppel based on promises made by Quinn on sale.

Pauline's contractual licence is personal in nature only and as such despite Quinn's knowledge of Pauline's occupation of the land, Pauline's interest will not be binding on Quinn. Pauline must leave the land within a reasonable period of time.

. Richard granted Sureta a contractual licence to use his land to host a series of outdoor performances of Shakespeare's Twelfth Night this summer. The shows have all sold out. The licence was committed to writing and was stated to run for the whole summer. Sureta moved all her performance staging, lighting equipment, and costumes onto the land in readiness for the performances. Rehearsals had also begun. Out of nowhere, Richard informed Sureta that he needed the land and that she could not use the land as they had contracted. Sureta was forced to leave the land and cancel all the planned performances. Sureta seeks your advice. What is her status here? Select one of the following.

A licence is a personal interest and weak in terms of enforceability. Sureta has no recourse and no remedy available. Although this may seem harsh, this is simply an example of the precarity of contractual licences and the advantage of proprietary interests such as leases.

A licence is a personal interest and non-proprietary. This means that the only remedy that Sureta has is contractual. She will be able to claim damages for any loss suffered as a result of Richard's breach of contract: Wood v Leadbitter (1845).

A licence is a personal interest and non-proprietary. Sureta can either bringing an action for damages or allege a criminal offence has been committed subject to the nature of her removal from the land.

A licence is a personal interest and non-proprietary. Sureta can claim damages for breach of contract. She may also be able to rely on equity by arguing that equity should imply a term that the licence is irrevocable until the contract is fulfilled (i.e. performances are completed) and an order for specific performance to enforce the contract: Hurst v Picture Theatres (1915); Verrall v Great Yarmouth Borough Council (1981).

Quiz Content