Legal News

A battle over a Stockport sandwich shop which resulted into massive legal fees and expert costs came under strong criticism from Lord Justice Jackson.
He was delivering judgment at the Court of Appeal, and awarded the evicted tenant, Sheila Grange, only just over £9,000 in damages.
Grange entered into a lease agreement in Stockport for six years, while the landlords Mr and Mrs Quinn lived upstairs.
Grange was evicted for grounds which were not serious enough to constitute a breach of the lease such as not keeping the windows clean etc. there was a failure on part of the landlords in giving the proper notices terminating the lease under the Law of Property Act 1925.
Lord Justice Jackson giving majority judgment in Grange v Quinn [2013] EWCA Civ 24, said that it was not necessary to calculate in detail to assess whether the claimant had paid too much for the lease and goodwill of the shop.
He added, the starting point for assessing damages was the purchase price which the claimant paid, namely, £9,950. If the defendants evicted the claimant after only six months and still kept the purchase price it was clearly unjust.
Jackson LJ agreed with Mrs Justice Gloster that the claimant needed to deduct only £871 from the original premium paid “for the benefit which she has received before the unlawful eviction”.

He added that the parties have to assess their rights and liabilities without incurring massive legal fees and expert costs as was seen in this case.

He ruled that Grange’s appeal was to be allowed and he awarded damages of £9,079 which would meet the justice of this case he said. It accorded with both principle and precedent.

Lady Justice Gloster agreed, but Lady Justice Arden dissented.

Arden LJ said the “relevant question” was whether Grange would have made a profit over the premium amount if and when she walked away at the end of the lease.

The recorder was not satisfied that the business would have been profitable over the period of the lease and that Grange would not have made enough profit to cover the premium.

The law firm which acted for Grange had said that it had acted on a conditional fee basis because of her limited means.

The housing solicitor speaking for the firm said that if commercial landlords wish to enforce their rights under the lease, it was vital they took professional legal advice before taking any pre-emptive steps because, as this case had shown, the financial consequences could be enormous.

From a commercial tenant’s perspective, it was equally important to contact a housing solicitor without delay if their landlord takes, or threatens to take, enforcement action against them because time is very much of the essence in these cases.