AG Securities V Vaughan Case Study

Discuss the significance of the case AG Seurities v Vaughan. In the two cases tried together, the House of Lords reasoned that having exclusive possession of a bedroom is not enough to form a tenancy and in addition a tenancy cannot be treated as a license in relation to a section which disputes the nature of the agreement. In AG Securities v Vaughan four people were to share a flat with three other people in favour of the landlord after they had signed the lease. The lease agreement was signed by the individuals each at separate times respectively which allowed them to share a flat. Each of the licenses were given at separate times and for separate license fees as people occupied the flat. The House of Lords held that the content of the …show more content…
In Street v Montford the House of Lords had issued a warning to the courts to 'be astute to detect and frustrate sham devices and artificial transactions whose only object is to disguise the grant of a tenancy and to evade the Rent Acts’. The vast amount of the Court of Appeal in AG Securities v Vaughan viewed the agreement between both parties as establishing a tenancy, on the premise that the occupiers had the legal right to exclusive possession of the property and in essence was protected by the Rent Act. The motion that the agreements were to be as a sham device or artificial transaction was void. The recommendation that an individual would be substituted for another was deemed as setting up a hint to give up, followed by a new tenancy. Sir George Waller failed to agree that the occupiers did not enjoy exclusive possession of the land as he stated this initiated 'serious doubts about each of the four unities’, that the agreements were not made out of pretence and that arrangements for diving the land and changed the occupiers. This holding was also carried out in the House of Lords. Being that the agreements were created separately, signed on a different basis and on different terms and could not by 'legal alchemy’ establish a joint agreement so as to collectively confer on the occupiers exclusive possession of the property as joint