Bracey v Read: 1963

References: [1963] Ch 88
Coram: Cross J
Ratio: A tenancy of land used for training horses was a business tenancy within the 1954 Act. The word ‘premises’ is not defined in the Act. Its legal meaning is the subject matter of the habendum in a lease, and it would cover any sort of property of which a lease is granted. ‘… but no doubt the word is used sometimes in a popular sense which is considerably more restricted, in the sense of buildings, or buildings with land immediately adjoining them. In the popular sense it would not be said that some gallops on a downland with no buildings on or near them, could be described as ‘premises’. Sometimes in legislation ‘premises’ has been construed in a popular rather than in a legal sense.
Statutes: Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 Part II
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Spring House (Freehold) Ltd v Mount Cook Land Ltd CA (Bailii, [2001] EWCA Civ 1833)
    A lease provided against the tenant leaving his goods outside the premises, and the landlords objected to motor vehicles being parked there.
    Held: The words had to be interpreted in the light of the intentions of the parties at the time. Motor . .
  • Cited – Regina v Yuthiwattana CACD ([1984] 128 SJ 661, [1984] Crim LR 562)
    The defendant appealed against his convictions under the 1977 Act.
    Held: Under section 1(2) the deprivation of occupation for one day was insufficient. To constitute an offence, the deprivation had to take the character of an eviction. . .

(This list may be incomplete)

Last Update: 15 June 2020
Ref: 184143