Occupational rights: Time for a rethink?
Mark Pawlowski
Abstract
Mark Pawlowski
Abstract
The article suggests that since, out of the three requirements for the existence of a tenancy identified in Street v Mountfound [1985] AC 809, only exclusive possession actually determines whether an occupier is a tenant, the traditional distinctions between personal tenancies, contractual licences and tenancies at will should be dropped in favour of a simplified structure of personal or proprietary occupational rights.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
The article suggests that since, out of the three requirements for the existence of a tenancy identified in Street v Mountfound [1985] AC 809, only exclusive possession actually determines whether an occupier is a tenant, the traditional distinctions between personal tenancies, contractual licences and tenancies at will should be dropped in favour of a simplified structure of personal or proprietary occupational rights.
Key concepts: Leasehold estate, Possession (linguistics), Business, Law and economics, Law, Actuarial science, Economics, Political science