Types of

Tenancy
Hampton School
Law Unit 2 Module 3
Objectives

Define tenancy
Examine carefully the different types of tenancy
Discuss related case
Introduction
A tenancy or a lease is an arrangement whereby the
owner of land, the landlord or the lessor, agrees to
grant the right to exclusive possession of his land to
the tenant or the lessee, for a fixed period, on the
payment of rent. There are five types of tenancies to
be discussed in this lesson:
(1) Lease for a fixed period
(2) Periodic tenancy
(3) Tenancy at Will
(4) Tenancy at sufferance
(5) Tenancy by estoppel
Lease for a fixed period
A fixed-term tenancy or tenancy for years lasts for
some fixed period of time. It has a definite beginning
date and a definite ending date. Despite the name
"tenancy for years", such a tenancy can last for any
period of time—even a tenancy for one week may be
called a tenancy for years. At common law the duration
did not need to be certain, but could be conditioned
upon the happening of some event, (e.g., "until the
crops are ready for harvest" or "until the war is over").
Lease for a fixed period
A fixed term tenancy comes to an end automatically when
the fixed term runs out or, in the case of a tenancy that ends
on the happening of an event, when the event occurs. There
is no need for any notice to quit by the landlord or the
tenant. The landlord cannot terminate the lease before the
end of the period unless the tenant has breached a condition
in the lease, nor can the tenant terminates the lease before it
has run its course. He may however ask the landlord to
accept a surrender of the lease which the landlord may
accept or reject. This type of tenancy may pass on by will or
intestacy on the death of the tenant.
Here, M verbally agreed to allow D, with whom he was on friendly terms, to occupy his house

Deen v Mahabir 1970

rent free for three to four months whilst D’s house was under construction. After some
considerable time had elapsed, M repeatedly requested D to leave the house, but D remained in
occupation. An ejectment order was made by the magistrate, against which D appealed on the
ground that the magistrate has no jurisdiction to determine the complaint because the
relationship of landlord and tenant had not existed between the parties within S 3 of the
Summary Ejectment Ordinance, Ch 27, no, 17. Held by the court of appeal: where exclusive
possession was given to a new occupant, it was to be inferred that a tenancy had been created,
unless special circumstances existed which shows that only a licence had been intended.
Periodic tenancy
A periodic tenancy also known as a tenancy from
year to year, month to month, or week to week, is
an estate that exists for some period of time
determined by the term of the payment of rent.
Either the landlord or the tenant may terminate a
periodic tenancy when the period or term is
nearing completion, by giving notice to the other
party as required by statute or case law in the
jurisdiction.
Periodic tenancy
Neither landlord nor tenant may terminate a periodic
tenancy before the period has ended, without incurring an
obligation to pay for the months remaining on the
lease. Either party must give notice if it intends to terminate
a tenancy. Subject to agreement to the contrary, the length
of notice requires to terminate a periodic tenancy depends
on the form that the tenancy takes via: a weekly tenancy can
be terminated by a weeks notice; a monthly tenancy by one
month notice while a yearly tenancy needs 1/2 year notice
to terminate.
Periodic tenancy
The notice must also state the effective date of
termination, which, in some jurisdictions, must be on
the last day of the payment period. In other words, if a
month-to-month tenancy began on the 15th of the
month, in a jurisdiction with a last day requirement the
termination could not be effective on the 20th of the
following month, even though this would give the
tenant more than the required one month's notice
Tenancy at will
A tenancy at will is a lease with no expiration date.
Either the landlord or the tenant may terminate it at any
time by giving reasonable notice. Unlike a periodic
tenancy, it isn't associated with a time period. It may
last for many years, but it could be ended at any time
by either the lessor or the lessee for any reason, or for
no reason at all. Proper notice, as always with
landlord/tenant law, must be given, as set forth in the
state's statutes. If there is no formal lease, the tenancy
at will is the one that usually exists.
Tenancy at will
A tenancy at usually terminates when either party does
an act which is incompatible with its continuance, for
example where:
Tenant commits waste against the property;
Tenant attempts to assign the tenancy;
Tenant uses the property to operate a criminal enterprise;
Landlord transfers his/her interest in the property;
Landlord leases the property to another person;
Tenant or landlord dies.
Tenancy at sufferance
A tenancy at sufferance (sometimes called a holdover
tenancy) exists when a tenant remains in possession of
a property after the expiration of a lease, and until the
landlord acts to eject the tenant from the property.
Although the tenant is technically a trespasser at this
point, and possession of this type is not a true estate in
land, authorities recognize the condition in order to
hold the tenant liable for rent. The landlord may
evict such a tenant at any time, and without notice.
Tenancy at sufferance
The landlord may also impose a new lease on the
holdover tenant. For a residential tenancy, this new
tenancy is month to month. For a commercial tenancy
of more than a year, the new tenancy is year to year;
otherwise it is the same period as the period before the
original lease expired. In either case, the landlord can
raise the rent, so long as the landlord has told the
tenant of the higher rent before the expiration of the
original lease.
Tenancy by estoppel
This is a lease that exists despite the fact that the
person who granted it had no legal right to do so. The
usual situation is where a mortgage prohibits the
mortgagor from granting tenancy without the
mortgagee’s consent. Where the mortgagor, who has
not sought the necessary permission from the
mortgagee to grant a tenancy, grants a tenancy, the
tenant cannot deny title of his landlord and must
acknowledge the mortgagor as his landlord
Tenancy by estoppel
When the mortgagee discovers that the tenant is
there and takes action, the tenancy by estoppel
becomes void. The mortgagee is considered to
have “title paramount” to deal with possession
during the currency of the mortgage. When the
mortgagee exerts his rights, the tenant by estoppel
becomes a trespasser.
Tenancy by estoppel
In Typhoon 8 Research Ltd v Seapower Resources
International Ltd [2001], the owner of land mortgaged
it, and then leased the premises to the plaintiff in
breach of a term of the mortgage which required the
mortgagor to have the prior written consent of the
mortgagee to lease.
In the above case, the tenant was a tenant by estoppel
because, between himself and the mortgagor, he could
not deny the mortgagor’s right to lease the land and so
the tenant had to pay rent to the mortgagor
Land Lord and tenant – Rights and
Protection
As we have seen, the relationship of landlord and
tenant is governed by a number of covenants, express
and implied. This relationship is one of the most
common in law, so many persons being a part of it,
both in private and commercial life. We shall examine
how the law protects the land lord and the tenant, to
prevent either one from exploiting the other’s interest.
Firstly, we shall look at the common law principles and
then at some statutory provisions.
Land Lord and tenant – Rights and
Protection
At common law the balance in the relationship of
landlord and tenant is titled in favour of the
landlord. As long as the landlord observes his
covenants (e.g. not to derogate from the grant, and
for quite enjoyment), he is well within his rights to
act decisively against the tenant for any breach of
the tenant’s covenants (e.g. to pay rent)
Land Lord and tenant – Rights and
Protection
Statutory provisions have provided some relief for
tenants. While not removing the landlord’s right
entirely, more restraint is required. In one
territory, Jamaica, the common law right of
distress against tenants’ property has been
removed by statute. And in Trinidad and Tobago,
the Courts have held that there can be no distress
against a chattel house
EVALUATION 1
Do the following question during class
Evaluation 1