4 ‘Substantial’ agricultural user
5.15 Section 1(1) of the 1986 Act expressly envisages both non-agricultural and agricultural land being included in an agricultural holding. The central issue, then, is whether, having regard to the terms of the tenancy, the actual or contemplated use of the land and ‘any other relevant circumstances’, the whole of the land comprised in the tenancy, subject to such exceptions as do not substantially affect the agricultural character of the tenancy, is let for use as agricultural land.
The formulation now found in s 1(2) expresses in negative form the ‘substantial user’ test previously formulated by the courts. One must look at the letting as a whole and ascertain whether the parties intended the predominant user to be agricultural:‘One must look at the substance of the matter and see whether as a matter of substance the land comprised in the tenancy, taken as a whole, is an agricultural holding. If it is, then the whole of it is entitled to the protection of the Act. If it is not, then none of it is so entitled.’30
5.16 Despite early doubts31 it is now clearly established that the 1986 Act does not effect a severance of non-agricultural land where the predominant user is agricultural.32 It follows there can be no severance of a notice to quit, which latter must comply with the requirements of the 1986 Act if the substantial user is agricultural, and will terminate the tenancy of both agricultural and non-agricultural land included in the holding.