Clore v Theatrical Properties [1938] 3 All ER 483
Country:
United Kingdom
Reviewed By Oxbridge Law Team
Updated 2024-01-04 07:02:08 UTC
The asignee of a licencee of a theatre café, could not enforce terms against a new landlord who did not buy subject to the assignee’s rights.
The court held that a licence creates no interest in land, so its terms are not binding on successors in title.
Any comments or edits about this case?
Get in touch Similar cases
Ashburn Anstalt v Arnold
Various leases of properties had been granted. Defendant occupied the property under an arrangement under which they paid no rent. The landlord sought possession, saying that the agreements were li...
IDC v Clark
Plaintiff and B signed a deed (which described itself as a licence), purporting to bind all successors, to create an opening between their houses through which they could pass. Defendant bought B’s h...
Re Union of London & Smith’s Conveyance
CA held that Where on a sale NOT under a building scheme a restrictive covenant is taken, the benefit of which is not on the sale annexed to the land retained by the covenantee so as to run with it,...
Hill v Tupper
Plaintiff owned an allotment of land on the side of a river ran his boat on the river which he was allowed to do by the council for his business. Court held that this was a licence and could not be a...
Ashburn Anstalt v Arnold
Rent payment is not a necessary requirement for a tenancy agreement. The tenants held the land with a better interest. A constructive trust arises when the property owner's behaviour leads to an ineq...
Ambitious and intelligent students
choose Oxbridge Notes.
- Customer Support
- Sellers FAQ
- Contact Us
- Privacy Policy
- Terms and Conditions
©2024 Oxbridge Notes. All right reserved.