#17299 - Licences - GDL Land Law

These are not proprietary rights. Mere personal permission to use the land in question.

• King v David Allen [1916] – licence to advertising company was not enforceable against the new tenants of a cinema.

Do not bind a third party, they cannot be put on the register, cannot generate an overriding interest.

No formalities to do with their creation.

• Can arise orally, written agreement, deed, conduct.

Three Categories of Licence:

• Bare license: permission without payment, sometimes known as a gratuitous license

  • Terminable by the land owner on giving reasonable notice (Robson v Hallett), terminable without liability.

• License coupled with a grant: M(D calls this academic over-analysis)

  • The land owner might give somebody a property right, which may require ancillary permission (e.g. access to land). License has no independent existence

  • Jones v Earl of Tankeville [1909]

• Contractual license: this is where the land owner gives permission in return for contractual consideration (e.g. being in lectures, riding the tube)

  • The terms of this license are often established by a document. Remedies are contractual.

Some argue there is also a fourth category: estoppel license

• This is an oxymoron. Historically, many cases of estoppel grew out of a license – people labelled this as estoppel licenses.

• Rather it is a proprietary right growing out of a personal right.

Personal Constructive Trusts:

• Landowner (A) sells land to P. L has a license on the land. Here as a matter of property law this license cannot bind P.

  • However, if P promises A he will respect the licence and thereby gains an advantage (e.g. lower price) then equity will impose a personal constructive trust.

  • This is a personal equitable obligation and Z (later purchaser) will not have to respect license.

• Principle recognized in Binions v Evans [1972]. But Denning implied a much broader application.

  • Ashburn Anstolt v Arnold [1988] – rejected...