Plant v Oakes

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Court: High Court
• Judge: O'Hanlon J.
• Judgment Date: 01 January 1991
• Neutral Citation: [1989] IEHC 29
• Date: 01 January 1991

[1989] IEHC 29

THE HIGH COURT

THE CIRCUIT COURT

PLANT v. OAKES

ON APPEAL FROM

SOUTH EASTERN CIRCUIT COUNTY OF WEXFORD IN THE MATTER OF THE LANDLORD AND TENANT (AMENDMENT) ACT 1980

BETWEEN

GEORGE PLANT AND GWEN PLANT

APPLICANTS

AND

DOROTHY OAKES, EXECUTRIX OF WILLIAM OAKES, DECEASED

RESPONDENT

Citations:

LANDLORD & TENANT (AMDT) ACT 1980 S13(1)(a)

TERRY V STOKES 1993 1 IR 204

FROST V CASLON & WILKINS 1929 2 KB 138

TENDLER V SPROULE 1947 I AER 193

STOKE LAMBE V SEARS CLC 1947–51 PARA 539

O'REILLY V KEVANS 1935 69 ILTR 1

ROLLS V MILLER 1884 27 CH 71

Synopsis:

WORDS AND PHRASES

"Bona fide used"

Tenement - New tenancy - Entitlement - Dwelling-house - Room used as office - Business conducted elsewhere - Whether house used partly for business purposes - ~See~ Landlord and Tenant, new tenancy - (Appeal from Circuit Court - O'Hanlon J. - 16/3/89)

|Plant v. Oakes|

LANDLORD AND TENANT

New tenancy

Entitlement - Tenement - Business equity - Dwelling-house - Dining-room used as office - Business of tenant conducted elsewhere - Whether house bona fide used partly for business purposes - Held that the applicant's dwelling-house had been used bona fide by the applicant for the required period partly for the purpose of conducting his garage business, and that he was entitled to a new tenancy in the house - Landlord and Tenant (Amendment) Act, 1980, s. 13 - (Appeal from the Circuit Court - O'Hanlon J. - 16/3/89) - [1991] 1 I.R. 185

|Plant v. Oakes|

1 Judgment delivered by O'Hanlon J. the 16th day of March, 1989.

2 For the purpose of the present proceedings it is not in dispute that the Respondent is the legal owner of the house and premises, Kilcannon House, Enniscorthy, Co. Wexford, and that the first-named Applicant, George Plant, was given a tenancy of the said premises by the Respondent's late husband and predecessor in title, in or about the year 1971.

3 Since that time the Applicants, who are husband and wife, have lived in Kilcannon House as their family home. The house is set back from the Dublin Road about 500 yards, and at the road frontage and connected to the house by a long avenue, is a garage where the first-named Applicant has carried on business since the 1976/1977 period. The garage premises were erected on land sold to the said Applicant by William Oakes deceased.

4 In the year 1988 the Respondent served a Notice to Quit dated the 4th March, 1988, for the purpose of terminating the Applicant's periodic tenancy in Kilcannon House and the Applicants have countered by claiming a new lease in the said premises pursuant to the provisions of the Landlord and Tenant (Amendment) Act, 1980, and relying on what is known as the "business equity" as referred to in Section 13, sub-sec. (1) (a) of that Act. I am satisfied that the original tenancy in the premises was granted to the first-named Applicant only and that the entitlement (if any) to a new lease would arise in his favour only and not in favour of the second-named Applicant.

5 For the purpose of satisfying the requirements of Section 13, sub-sec. (1) (a) of the Act the Applicant must show that the premises are a "tenement" within the meaning of the Act (an issue which has not been contested); that he was tenant for not less than three years ending with the termination of the previous tenancy (again undisputed), and that the premises were during the whole of such three-year period "bona fide used wholly or partly for the purpose of carrying on a business." The latter requirement is descriptive of the real issue which arises for determination in this case.

6 The Applicant claims that the dining-room in the house was set aside for use as an office as a necessary...