Lace v Chantler [1944] KB 368

Facts

• The case concerned a purported lease agreement granted "for the duration of the war" during World War II.
• The landlord sought to regain possession, asserting the lease was void due to uncertainty of its term.
• The tenant argued for the validity of the agreement and the right to remain in possession.
• The crux of the dispute was whether defining a lease term by reference to the end of the war—a future, indeterminate event—complied with the legal requirement for certainty of term in leasehold agreements.

Issues

1. Whether a lease granted for "the duration of the war" provided the necessary certainty of maximum term required for a valid lease.
2. Whether a lease dependent on an indeterminate future event, rather than a fixed or ascertainable period, can be upheld as a leasehold tenancy.
3. Whether the lack of a fixed or determinable end date renders such a lease void.

Decision

• The court held the lease was not valid because it lacked a certain or ascertainable maximum term.
• "For the duration of the war" was found to be an insufficiently certain term as the end date was unknown at the outset.
• The lease was rendered void, and the landlord's claim for possession succeeded.
• The court reaffirmed that a lease must specify a fixed or readily ascertainable duration at its commencement to be legally effective.

Legal Principles

• For a lease to be valid, it must have certainty of term, meaning the maximum duration is fixed or ascertainable from the outset.
• Leases linked to uncertain future events, with no defined maximum duration, are void for uncertainty.
• Periodic tenancies, unlike such indefinite leases, are valid because they incorporate mechanisms for termination by notice, providing determinability.
• The decision distinguishes fixed-term leases from periodic tenancies and reinforces that property interests must be clear and predictable for both landlords and tenants.
• Subsequent cases, such as Prudential Assurance Co Ltd v London Residuary Body [1992] 2 AC 386 and Re Midland Railway Co’s Agreement [1971] Ch 725, confirmed and refined this requirement, upholding invalidity where no determinable term exists.

Conclusion

Lace v Chantler [1944] KB 368 remains a leading authority establishing that a lease must be for a fixed or ascertainable maximum term to be valid. Leases tied to indefinite events are void, ensuring clarity and predictability in leasehold arrangements and protecting the rights of both landlords and tenants.