Akici v LR Butlin [2006]


  • A lessor served a notice of re-entry to the lessee under s 146 of the Law of Property Act 1925 for the breach of a covenant not to share possession of business premises after a¬†pizza takeaway restaurant (not the lessee) started trading at the lessor’s business premises.
  • The notice alleged that the lessee had “parted with possession”
  • The lessor took physical (peaceable) possession and changed the locks


  • Had there been a breach; was the notice effective; was the breach remediable?


  • No breach, ineffective notice, but if the notice had been effective, the breach was remediable


  • Possession must be distinguished from occupation – just because another business was occupying the land did not mean that the lessee had parted with possession – there had been no breach by way of parting with possession
  • The s 146 notice was therefore ineffective
  • Even if the notice was effective, it would have been remediable, and was remedied by the lessee’s acquisition of all of the shares in the occupying pizza takeaway company
RELATED CASE  Baxter v Four Oaks Properties [1965]

Posted in Land Law Revision Notes.

This page was last updated on 3rd April 2015

© 2020 Webstroke Law - Terms and Privacy Policy