The repeal of section 57 of the 1954 Act and the addition of a new ground of opposition to renewal has been proposed. On 28 February 2007 the Department for Communities and Local Government published a consultation paper looking at this area.

Section 57 currently allows public bodies that are landlords of commercial premises to regain possession of premises if there are required for their own purposes. The section is rarely used and the Government are consulting on whether it should be removed.

It is proposed that a new ground of opposition be added to section 30 if section 57 is repealed. Currently there are seven grounds of opposition (failure to comply with repairing obligations, persistent delay in paying rent, other substantial breaches, suitable alternative accommodation, consolidation of sublet parts, redevelopment, or requirement for own use). The new grounds proposed for public bodies are:

  • If vacant possession of the property is required to make it available for development by a third party developer in fulfilment of redevelopment plans; or
  • If vacant possession is required to enable use by a third party carrying out a specific function on behalf of the public body concerned.

Responses to the consultation are to be received by Friday 25 May.

Consultation paper: Landlord and Tenant Act 1954: Section 57

For details of other reforms proposed to the 1954 Act please see below:

To view the article in full, please see below:

Full Article

Landlords and tenants may benefit from proposed further reform of Part II of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 following a review by the Department for Communities and Local Government.

Most of the recommendations seek to clarify the current law and by so doing to simplify the means by which parties contract out of the security of tenure provisions of the Act. They include the following proposals:

  1. The notice warning a tenant of the effects of excluding security of tenure should remain effective in the event of changes (even major ones) to the proposed lease terms. Only the tenant’s declaration should need to be specific to the lease eventually granted.

  2. The warning notice should be effective if served on the tenant’s authorised representative as well as on the tenant itself.

  3. A lease, made pursuant to an Agreement for Lease in respect of which the contracting out procedures had been followed, should not attract security of tenure even if, prior to execution of the lease, there has been a change in the identity of the landlord.

  4. Where a contracted out lease provides that a guarantor may be required to enter into a new lease following default by the tenant and the guarantor is required to take a new lease, the new lease should automatically be contracted out also.

The DCLG declined however to recommend that a tenant should be required to inform a landlord if it does not wish to renew its tenancy following service of a Section 25 Notice.

This article was written for Law-Now, CMS Cameron McKenna's free online information service. To register for Law-Now, please go to www.law-now.com/law-now/mondaq

Law-Now information is for general purposes and guidance only. The information and opinions expressed in all Law-Now articles are not necessarily comprehensive and do not purport to give professional or legal advice. All Law-Now information relates to circumstances prevailing at the date of its original publication and may not have been updated to reflect subsequent developments.

The original publication date for this article was 01/03/2007.