5 Unlawful use

5.17 Section 1(2) of the 1986 Act refers to land ‘let for use as agricultural land’. If, therefore, the tenant carries on agricultural activity in breach of the terms of the tenancy agreement the land will not be an agricultural holding.

So, for example, where a house was let with nine and a half acres of rough pasture under an agreement which prohibited use ‘otherwise than as a private dwelling house’, the subsequent use of the land to keep poultry and cattle did not make it an agricultural holding.³³ However, where 15 acres of land were let together with a farmhouse under an agreement which prohibited the carrying on of any ‘profession, trade or business’ at the property, the Court of Appeal held that the land was an agricultural holding, as the parties clearly intended that it should be used for the business of farming. The prohibition was construed as one on the use of the land for any profession, trade or business ‘other than agricultural business’. There was therefore no breach of covenant, and the landlord’s notice to quit was invalid, as it did not comply with the Agricultural Holdings legislation.³⁴ Whether an existing agricultural user is in breach of the terms of the tenancy agreement will depend on the construction of the agreement itself, and the intention of the parties at the time of making it. Where the intended user was clearly agricultural the courts will (in so far as is possible) construe the agreement accordingly. Where there has been a breach of the tenancy agreement, receipt of rent by the landlord with actual knowledge of the breach (ie the agricultural user) may constitute a waiver of the breach of covenant, even though the tenancy does not thereby become one of an agricultural holding (see below).

<< | >>

↑

Source: Rodgers Christopher. Agricultural Law. Bloomsbury Publishing,2016. — 914 p.. 2016

More legal literature on Laws.Studio

5 Unlawful use

More on the topic 5 Unlawful use: