Gambar halaman

It is a general rule in the case of a yearly tenancy, that notice to quit must be half a year before the expiration of the year; the case of lodgings depends upon a particular contract, and is an exception to the general rule. The agreement between the parties may be for a month or less time, and there much shorter notice would be sufficient, where the tenant has held over the time agreed upon, than in the other case (a).

The whole question depends upon the nature of the first contract: so that if the parties have agreed that the tenant shall hold for a term certain, no notice of course can be necessary (a); but if the tenant hold for no particular period, reasonable notice must be given, which is regulated generally, if not always, by the local custom of the particular place or district, which for the most part requires the same space of time for notice as the period for which the lodgings are taken, as a week's notice, where taken for a week; a month's, where taken for a month, and so forth; but this is not always the case, for it is not always necessary (it is presumed) that a quarter's notice should be given where the rent is paid quarterly, and it is understood to be a quarterly taking; for a month's notice is sometimes customary, and which probably a Court and Jury would think generally reasonable (b).

If a house, originally entire, be divided into several apartments, with an outer door to each apartment, and no communication with each other subsist, in such case the several apartments are considered in law as distinct mansion-houses. But if the owner live in the house, all the untenanted apartments shall be considered as parts of his house. Yet, if there be two several tenements originally, and they become inhabited by several families, who make but one avenue for both, and use it promiscuously, the original severalty is so far recognized and regarded, that they continue to be severally rateable to the poor (c).

These lodgings constitute such an interest according to the duration of the term, that to many purposes the lodgers are considered in law in the light of householders, and enjoy the same protection and greater immunities, for they are not compellable to serve parish offices.

In respect to letting houses, though, as has been before observed, there is no distinction in reason between houses and land, as to the time of giving notice to quit in yearly tenancies, it being necessary that both should be governed by one rule, and that where rent is reserved quarterly, it does not dispense with the regular six months' notice to quit required by law, but is merely a collateral matter: yet in the case of a house being let for a shorter term than a year, the

(e) Right d. Flower v. Darby. iT.R.1 (I) Doe d. Parry v. HaieU. I Esp. R. 94. >J9-6». I (/) Tracey v. Talbot, 6 Mod. »I4.

holding assimilates itself to that of a lodging: therefore where a house was taken by the month, it was held that a month's notice was sufficient: for a notice to quit has reference in all cases to the letting (a).

A tenant from week to week, continuing in possession after the expiration of a notice to quit and demand made, is not liable to an action on the stat. 4 Geo. 2. c. 28. for double value (b).

If the lodgings be furnished, it may be as well to have a schedule of the goods they contain affixed to the agreement, if there be one in writing; in the same manner as in the case of a lease of a house with goods.

Section III. Of strict Tenants at Will.

Although Courts of law have of late years leaned as much as possible against construing demises (c), where no certain term is mentioned, to be tenancies at will, but (as we have just seen) have rather held them to be tenancies from year to year so long as both parties please, especially where an annual rent is reserved (d); and although it is said, that in the country, leases at will in the strict legal notion of a lease at will, being found extremely inconvenient, exist only notionally, the observation, Mr. Hargrove thinks, means, not that estates at will may not arise now as well as formerly, but only that it is no longer usual to create such estates by express words, and that the Judges incline strongly against implying them (e).

Tenant at will is where lands or tenements are let by one man to another, to have and to hold to him at the will of the lessor, by force of which lease the lessee is in possession. In this case, the lessee is called tenant at will, because he hath no certain nor sure estate, for the lessor may put him out at what time it pleaseth him. But every lease at will must be at the will of both parties (e).

If one lease for years, with a proviso that lessor may enter at his will, it is a lease at will (f).

So, if one demise a tenement to another excepting the new house for his habitation, when he pleases to stay there, and at other times for the use of the lessee; the lessee has the new house as tenant at will(/).

So, if one give to another licence to take the profits of his land without mentioning for how long a period, or reserving an annual rent, it shall be a lease at will (g).

[ocr errors][ocr errors]

A man who enters and enjoys under a void lease, and pays rent, is a tenant at will, and not a disseisor (a).

But if a man enter by colour of a grant or conveyance which was void, and did not stand with the rule of law; he shall be a disseisor, and not a tenant at will (£).

A mortgagor is in some respects strictly a tenant at will, andin many cases is like a tenant at will (r).

Therefore if a mortgagee covenant that the mortgagor shall take the profits till default of payment; or that the mortgagor and his heirs shall take the profits, in the one case the mortgagor, and in the other his heir after his death, shall be tenant at will (b).

But if mortgagee covenant that he will not take the profits till default of payment, and the mortgagor enter immediately; he shall not be tenant at will; but only at sufferance; for it was not agreed that he should take, but that the mortgagee should not take (b).

A mortgagor however is not properly a tenant at will to the mortgagee, for he is not to pay him rent: he is indeed as much if not more like a receiver than a tenant at will; though in truth he is not either {d). He is only a tenant at will, because he is not entitled to the growing crops after the will is determined; for the mortgagee may bring his ejectment at any moment that he will; and he is entitled to the estate as it is with all the crops growing on it (c).

If tenant for years continue after his term, and his rent be paid and accepted as before, it is said that he shall be tenant at will; but that while he so continues, till his rent is paid and accepted, he is tenant at sufferance or rather at will. This however would be now construed to be a tenancy from year to year (£).

When tenancy at will was more known than it is now, the relation might be determined at any time; not as to those matters which during the tenancy remained a common interest between the parties; but as to any new contract the will might be instantly determined. When that interest was converted into the tenancy from year to year, the law fixed one positive rule for six months' notice; a rule that may in many cases be very convenient; in others, as for instance, that of nursery grounds, most inconvenient (e).

If a tenant whose lease is expired be permitted to continue in possession, pending a treaty for a further lease, he is not a tenant from year to year, but so strictly at will, that he may be turned out of possession without notice (/). So likewise if he be admitted tenant

[ocr errors][ocr errors]

pending a treaty for the purchase, which treaty is afterwards broken off (a).

A lessee at will may take a release of the inheritance, and thereby his estate is enlarged; or a confirmation for his life, upon which a remainder may be dependant (b).

Where a lease is made at will, rent being payable quarterly, the lessee, after a quarter of a year is commenced, may determine his will, but then he must pay that quarter's rent (c); and if the lessor determine his will after the commencement of a quarter, he shall lose his rent for that quarter. So, if half yearly (d).

Tenant at will may be ousted also by express words, or by implication: as if lessor come upon the land, and say that lessee shall not continue over, he may determine his will, though in the absence of the lessee. But words off the land will not, till notice to the lessee (d). Any act of desertion, or which is inconsistent with an estate at will, done by the tenant, operates as a determination of the estate; as assignment over to another, or commission of an act of waste (e). If therefore tenant at will take upon him to make a lease for years, which is a greater estate than he may make, that act is a disseisin and a determination of the will (f).

But though lessee at will make a lease to commence at a future day, it does not amount to a determination, till the lease commences in point of interest. So of an extent, till the liberate; and of outlawry, till seizure (d).

Though a person let into possession under an agreement to purchase, may be considered as tenant at will, yet his admission of a fictitious lease by entering into the common consent rule, is not a constructive determination of the will whereon an ejectment is maintainable (g).

But, though a tenant at will is at the will of both parties, the will shall not be determined by every act (b).

Thus, where a feme lessee at will takes husband, or a feme makes a lease at will and takes husband, although the feme hath put her will in her husband, yet it shall not be said to be a determination without the election of the lessor or the husband (b).

In tenancies at will the rent becomes due in consideration of the occupation; which, it is said, must therefore be averred (e).

Tenant at will (h) has an estate that he cannot forfeit for treason (t).

(a) Doe d. Moore v. Lawdor. I Stack. 308.

(b) Com. Dig. tit. Estates. (H. 3.)

(c) Layton v. Field. 3 Salk. %it. Parker

v. Harris. 4 Mod. 77. Leighton v. Theed

I Ld. Rayd. 707. Title v. Grevett. » Ld.

Rayd. 100. 8.

(d) Com. Dig. tit. Estates. (H. 6. H, 9.) (t) Cruise, Dig. tit. IX. 5-17. 1 Inst. 57.

(/) Blunden v. Baugh-hill. Cro.Car. 304.

(g) Right d. Lewis v. Beard. 13 East. 110.

(A) Bellasis v. Burbrick. 1 Salk. 309. S. C. I Ld. Rayd. 171.

(i) Dcnn d. Warren v. Fearnside. 1 WiU. 176.

Section IV. Of Tenants at sufferance.

Tenant at sufferance is he who enters by lawful demise or title, and afterwards wrongfully continues in possession; as if tenant pur auter vie continues in possession after the death of the cestui que vie (a).

So, any one who continues in possession without agreement, after a particular estate is ended (6).

There is a great diversity therefore between a tenant at will and a tenant at sufferance; for tenant at will is always by right, whereas tenant by sufferance entereth by a lawful lease, and holdeth over by wrong (a).

But against the king there is no tenant at sufferance, for the king not being capable of committing laches, such person will be an intruder (a).

So, if a guardian continue in possession after the full age of the heir: he is not a tenant by sufferance, but an abator (e).

Mortgagee covenants that mortgagor shall quietly enjoy till default of payment, and assigns: after assignment, mortgagor is only tenant at sufferance; for his continuing in possession does not turn the term to a right M.

(a) Co. Lit. 57. b. | (0 Ibid, k 471. ».

(b) Co:n. Dig. tit. Estates. H. 6-9. | (</) Sraartle v. Williams. Salk. S45.


Of the general Incidents to Leases.
Section I. Rent, when and how payable.

Of Public Impositions, parochial and parliamentary.
Section II. Taxes.
Section III. Poor's Rate.

Section I. Rent, when and how payable, c%c.

IN a preceding part of this work we have had occasion to explain the nature of rent, and the different kinds thereof. It must be remembered, that a rent cannot at law issue out of a term of years, but must come out of the reversion; therefore, if a


« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »