Chapman v Freeman

[1978] 3 All ER 878

---

Between: Chapman
And: Freeman

Court:

Judges: Lord Denning Mr
Geoffrey Lane LJ
Eveleigh LJ

Subject References:
Landlord and tenant
Business premises
Occupied for business purposes
Business purposes
Cottage let to hotel proprietor to house hotel staff
Occupation by staff convenient for hotel proprietor's business
No evidence that occupation by staff necessary for proprietor's business
Whether hotel proprietor occupying cottage 'for the purposes of a business carried on by him'

Legislative References:
Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 - s 23(1)

Case References:
Ramsbottom v Snelson - [1948] 1 All ER 201; [1948] 1 KB 473; [1948] LJR 946; 112 JP 160; 46 LGR 139, DC; 31(2) Digest (Reissue) 912, 7554
Bagettes Ltd v G P Estates Co Ltd - [1956] 1 All ER 729; [1956] Ch 290, CA
Hobson v Tulloch - [1898] 1 Ch 424; 67 LJ Ch 205
Lee-Verhulst (Investments) Ltd v Harwood Trust - [1972] 3 All ER 619; [1973] QB 204, CA

Judgment date: 5 May 1978

---

An hotel owner rented a small cottage some 50 yards from his hotel and used it to house some of the hotel staff. When the owner of the cottage died the administrator of her estate wished to regain possession of the cottage and issued a notice to quit against the hotel owner. In proceedings for possession the hotel owner contended that he occupied the cottage 'for the purposes of a business carried on by him', within s 23(1) ^[F1] of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, and was accordingly entitled to the protection of Part II of that Act. The county court judge refused to make a possession order. On appeal by the administrator,

Held - The cottage was not occupied by the hotel owner for business purposes, within s 23(1) of the 1954 Act, since it was merely convenient for his staff to live in the cottage and it had not been shown that it was necessary for the performance of their duties that they live there. The appeal would therefore be allowed (see p 897 h j and p 880 a b and f to p 881 a, post).

Notes

For tenancies to which the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 applies, see 23 Halsbury's Laws (3rd Edn) 885, para 1707.

For the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, s 23(1), see 18 Halsbury's Statutes (3rd Edn) 555.

Appeal

The plaintiff, Irwin Claude Chapman, the administrator of the estate of Nora Ann Hawken, deceased, appealed from the judgment of his Honour Judge Chope dated 8 December 1977 given at Bodmin County Court dismissing the plaintiff's claim for the freehold possession of a cottage at Pendoggett, St Kew, Bodmin, Cornwall, which had been let by the deceased to the defendant, R J Freeman. The facts are set out in the judgment of Lord Denning MR.