판결 이유
A tenancy can be created by agreement between the parties even where the grantor does not have a proprietary estate in the land. The question of whether an occupier is a tenant or licensee depends on the nature of the agreement, not on the grantor's own title.
사실관계
The London & Quadrant Housing Trust held a licence from Lambeth Council to use properties as temporary accommodation for homeless people. The Trust granted Mr Bruton an agreement described as a 'licence' to occupy a flat. Bruton claimed the agreement was in fact a tenancy, entitling him to enforce the landlord's repairing obligations under s.11 Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.
판결 요약
The House of Lords held that the agreement was a tenancy, not a licence. Applying Street v Mountford, the key question was whether the occupier had been granted exclusive possession for a term at a rent. Mr Bruton had exclusive possession, so the agreement created a tenancy regardless of what the parties called it, and regardless of the Trust's own limited title. The tenancy was binding between the parties even though it could not bind the freeholder.
주요 인용문
"The term 'lease' or 'tenancy' describes a relationship between two parties who are designated landlord and tenant. It is not concerned with the question of whether the party who granted the tenancy had a proprietary interest."
— Lord Hoffmann
후속 처리
Confirmed that a tenancy can exist as a personal contract even where the grantor has no estate in the land. Applied in subsequent housing cases involving temporary accommodation.