Over Taylor Biggs

The Tenant occupied a site to the south west of Heathrow Airport since 1978.  The Tenant's business included haulage, concrete crushing, demolition and skip hire and it was confirmed the Tenant never had permanent planning permission for these activities.

The Tenancy had been terminated by service of a valid Notice under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954. The Landlord indicated that it was opposed to granting a new tenancy. The Tenant challenged the validity of the Landlord's Notice. The Landlord went into liquidation and the Landlord disclaimed the freehold which was then transferred to Heathrow Airport Limited who continued to oppose the grant of a new tenancy.

In May 1998 the Local Planning Authority served an Enforcement Notice requiring discontinuance of use for haulage concrete crushing. This was upheld on an appeal to the Secretary of State. The Tenant failed to comply with this Enforcement Notice and was convicted of a criminal offence in 1990.

In March 1994 the Local Planning Authority granted a temporary planning permission for concrete crushing and for restoration of the part of the site. This was granted for a limited period of seven years.  A Section 106 Agreement required the Tenant to provide certain bonds to guarantee the restoration of the site. No bonds were provided and the Tenant failed to restore the site.

In June 1997 the Tenant was found to be using the site for haulage, concrete crushing and recycling and as a depot for its demolition business. In January 2001 the Tenant applied to remove the seven year time limit and in March 2006 applied for a permanent Planning Permission for concrete crusher. This was refused and the Tenant's appeal against that refusal was dismissed in March 2007. The Tenant applied for Judicial Review of that decision but not before the hearing of the case for the renewal of the tenancy.

In December 2006, the Local Planning Authority issued a Notice of Breach of a Planning Condition in respect of the time limit, which required the Tenant to cease concrete crushing by June 2007.

In July 2007 the Tenant applied for a Certificate of Lawful Use for haulage, demolition, soil importation, vehicle repairs and as a depot for bin, skip and plant hire. This application was also refused. The Tenant appealed on a more limited basis, seeking a Certificate for Lawful Use as a demolition contractor and a bin and skip hire business. This Appeal was pending at the time the High Court determined the question about the Lease.

With regard to the Lease the Court of Appeal held that a tenant's legal planning use was a relevant reason connected with the tenant's use and management of the tenancy under Section 30 Landlord and Tenant Act 1954. The Court felt it would be perverse to have ordered the Landlord to grant a new Tenancy.

The Tenant had committed criminal offences by using the site for haulage business since May 1990 in breach of the 1988 Enforcement Notice and the concrete crushing business since June 2007 in breach of the Breach of Condition Notice of June 2007.

In addition, apart from what was described as the "appalling past record" of breach of Planning Control, the Tenant was an unreliable witness. The Court concluded that if a new tenancy were to granted, the Tenant would be likely to continue to act unlawfully.

Landlords seeking to challenge renewals on similar grounds need to gather evidence showing the extent of the breach of the leasehold covenants and other reasons connected with the use or management of the land or buildings.

If a Landlord suspects there is a breach of Planning Control, it may be sensible to ask the Tenant to provide copies of Planning Notices and correspondence with the Local Planning Authority, particularly when notification is a requirement under the Lease provisions.