Long v. Tower Hamlets, [1996] 2 All ER 683

Can You Answer This?

Practice with real exam questions

Paula has recently moved into a vacant portion of an office building owned by the Redbridge Municipal Authority. Over the past few months, the Authority repeatedly informed Paula that it was unsure of any long-term plans for the space and that she might be asked to leave at short notice. Paula, however, has been given exclusive access to the area, and the Authority has not provided any formal license or lease agreement. No consistent rent is charged, but Paula occasionally pays a small contribution toward utility costs. Recently, the Authority suggested it might finalize its decision soon, leaving Paula concerned about the nature of her occupancy and potential termination.


Which of the following is the single best answer regarding Paula’s legal arrangement and any potential right of termination by the Authority?

Introduction

A tenancy at will happens when someone occupies land with the owner’s permission, without a formal lease or set duration. This short-term setup lasts only while both parties agree. Important points include the owner giving exclusive possession and both sides accepting that either can end the arrangement at any time. Unlike leases, no fixed term is needed. The case of Long v Tower Hamlets LBC [1996] 2 All ER 683 explains how courts recognize such tenancies and the facts they consider.

Exclusive Possession: Main Rule

Exclusive possession lets the occupier manage the property and keep others out, including the owner. The owner must clearly give this right through words or behavior. In Long, the court checked the occupier’s conditions to see if real exclusive possession was present. Simple allowance to stay (e.g., staying with a family member) is not enough. The court highlighted the importance of reviewing the real situation of occupation.

Parties’ Aims: Deciding Factor

Courts decide if a tenancy at will exists by fairly judging the parties’ intentions, based on their words and actions. Did the owner plan to give exclusive possession, and did the occupier agree to those terms? In Long v Tower Hamlets LBC, the court looked at exchanges between the parties. A written deal is not needed if behavior shows the necessary intent.

Rent’s Place in Tenancy at Will

Regular rent is typical in leases but not required here. Occasional or small payments do not block a tenancy at will if other factors are present. In Long, the court decided formal rent is not essential, separating this setup from periodic tenancies. This shows that exclusive possession and intent matter most.

Ending a Tenancy at Will

Either side can stop this tenancy at any time with fair notice. The notice length depends on the situation. The death of either party ends it at once. Long v Tower Hamlets LBC shows the arrangement’s uncertainty and how easily it can end, stressing that both sides must know its terms.

Comparing Tenancy at Will, Licenses, and Leases

A tenancy at will is not the same as licenses (which do not have exclusive possession) or leases (which have set terms). Long v Tower Hamlets LBC makes these differences clear, giving a way to weigh each type. Cases like Street v Mountford [1985] UKHL 4 further separate exclusive possession from basic occupancy rights.

Conclusion

Long v Tower Hamlets LBC sets out main rules for spotting a tenancy at will, focusing on exclusive possession and shared intent. Rent is not compulsory, though its lack does not rule out such a tenancy. The case distinguishes this setup from licenses and leases, helping the study of occupancy rights. By using tests from Long and Street v Mountford, courts can judge occupation agreements correctly. Each case needs full checking against legal rules to decide the parties’ rights and duties.

The answers, solutions, explanations, and written content provided on this page represent PastPaperHero's interpretation of academic material and potential responses to given questions. These are not guaranteed to be the only correct or definitive answers or explanations. Alternative valid responses, interpretations, or approaches may exist. If you believe any content is incorrect, outdated, or could be improved, please get in touch with us and we will review and make necessary amendments if we deem it appropriate. As per our terms and conditions, PastPaperHero shall not be held liable or responsible for any consequences arising. This includes, but is not limited to, incorrect answers in assignments, exams, or any form of testing administered by educational institutions or examination boards, as well as any misunderstandings or misapplications of concepts explained in our written content. Users are responsible for verifying that the methods, procedures, and explanations presented align with those taught in their respective educational settings and with current academic standards. While we strive to provide high-quality, accurate, and up-to-date content, PastPaperHero does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of our written explanations, nor any specific outcomes in academic understanding or testing, whether formal or informal.

Job & Test Prep on a Budget

Compare PastPaperHero's subscription offering to the wider market

PastPaperHero
Monthly Plan
$10
Assessment Day
One-time Fee
$20-39
Job Test Prep
One-time Fee
$90-350

Note the above prices are approximate and based on prices listed on the respective websites as of December 2024. Prices may vary based on location, currency exchange rates, and other factors.

Get unlimited access to thousands of practice questions, flashcards, and detailed explanations. Save over 90% compared to one-time courses while maintaining the flexibility to learn at your own pace.

Practice. Learn. Excel.

Features designed to support your job and test preparation

Question Bank

Access 100,000+ questions that adapt to your performance level and learning style.

Performance Analytics

Track your progress across topics and identify knowledge gaps with comprehensive analytics and insights.

Multi-Assessment Support

Prepare for multiple exams simultaneously, from academic tests to professional certifications.

Tell Us What You Think

Help us improve our resources by sharing your experience

Pleased to share that I have successfully passed the SQE1 exam on 1st attempt. With SQE2 exempted, I’m now one step closer to getting enrolled as a Solicitor of England and Wales! Would like to thank my seniors, colleagues, mentors and friends for all the support during this grueling journey. This is one of the most difficult bar exams in the world to undertake, especially alongside a full time job! So happy to help out any aspirant who may be reading this message! I had prepared from the University of Law SQE Manuals and the AI powered MCQ bank from PastPaperHero.

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Senior Associate at Trilegal