De Rothschild v Wing Rural District Council
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | THE MASTER OF THE ROLLS,LORD JUSTICE DANCKWERTS,LORD JUSTICE SACHS |
| Judgment Date | 20 December 1966 |
| Judgment citation (vLex) | [1966] EWCA Civ J1220-1 |
| Court | Court of Appeal |
| Date | 20 December 1966 |
[1966] EWCA Civ J1220-1
In The Supreme Court of Judicature
Court of Appeal
From:
H.H. Judge Grant
Leighton Buzzard.
The Master of the Rolls,
Lord Justice Danckwerts, and
Lord Justice Sachs.
MR. J.R. PEPPITT (instructed by Messrs. Lee, Bolton & Lee, Agents for Messrs. Horwood & James, Aylesbury) appeared on behalf of the Appellants.
MR. R. SCOTT (instructed by Messrs. Mcodie, Randall, Carr & Miles, Agents for Messrs. Simpson & Co., Leighton Buzzard) appeared on behalf of the Respondents.
The Housing Act, 1964, enables a local authority to compel owners of houses to bring them up to standard, subject to the statutory conditions being fulfilled.
The case concerns a cottage, 8 Vicarage Lane, Wing, near Leighton Buzzard, in Bedfordshire. It is owned by Mr. de Rothschild. It is a farm cottage which in 1955 he allowed one of his farm workers to occupy. The farm worker paid no rent or rates. During his employment, he was undoubtedly a "tenant" within the meaning of the Housing Act, 1964, Section 4(2). He was a person employed in agriculture who occupied the dwelling as part of the terms of his employment. But his employment was terminated on 28th May, 1965, by proper notice. Thereupon, he ceased to be a "tenant". His "tenancy" ended on 28th May, 1965. He was allowed to stay on in the cottage by Mr. de Rothschild as a licensee until he found somewhere else to live.
After that date the Council went through the machinery of the Housing Act to bring this house up to the standard amenities. The cottage had no proper bathroom or basin, no hot water system or indoor water closet. On 1st June, 1965, the Council declared that this was an "improvement area" because the dwellings were not up to standard, and published the required notice to that effect by Section 13(2). On 29th June, 1965, the Council gave the preliminary notice which is required by Section 14 of the Act. Mr. de Rothschild's solicitors at once contended that there was no "tenant" occupying the dwelling. The local authority did not accept that contention. They asked the occupier or his wife to sign a paper giving consent to the improvements. His wife did so. They then served an "immediate improvement notice" under Section 16. In order to give such a notice the local authority, under Section 14, have to be satisfied that the dwelling: "(a) is for the time being occupied by a tenant." Theyasserted that they were so satisfied and served the notice on Mr. de Rothschild.
Mr. de Rothschild appealed against the notice under Section 27(2)(e) of the Act. He said that the notice was "invalid on the ground that there was an error in it." There was certainly an error in it. The local authority had been in error from the beginning. They thought that Mr. Jones was a "tenant", whereas he was not a tenant at any material time. These notices can be served only when a "tenant" is there. A notice cannot be served in respect of an empty house, or an owner-occupied house, or in respect of a house where the "tenancy" has come to an end.
That was prima facie a good ground of appeal. But the council relied on subsection (3) of Section 25, which says: "In so...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Harrington v Croydon Corporation
...any doubt about that, such doubt would be removed by the decision of this court in ( de Rothschild v. Wing Rural District Council 1967 1 Weekly Law Reports 470). 14 I turn now to consider what is a very important question applying generally throughout the country alike to dwellings which ar......
-
F.F.F. Estates Ltd v Hackney London Borough Council
...a matter which had merit and was therefore not covered by s.91(7). And he relied on a dictum of Lord Justice Danckwerts in De Rothschild v. Wing Rural District Council 1967 1 WLR 470, 473 on the corresponding provision in s.27(3) of the Act of 1964 that it was "intended to deal with cases o......