Aslan v Murphy [1990] 1 WLR 766

Written By Nicolas Heyes

Court: Court of Appeal

Basic Facts: Murphy rented a basement room from Aslan under an agreement that required him to vacate the room for several hours each day, among other peculiar terms.

Issue: Distinguishing between a license and a lease.

Held: The court held that a license agreement could actually create a lease if the occupier was given exclusive possession of the property, regardless of the terminology used in the agreement.

  • (Lord Donaldson MR):

    • Key Considerations: Clauses that seem unrealistic or pretentious (like vacating a room daily) are indicators of a sham license. The retention of keys does not necessarily indicate a license if it’s for emergencies.

Nicolas Heyes
Previous

Bank of Ireland v Bell [2001] 2 F.L.R. 809
Next

Ashburn Anstalt v Arnold [1989] Ch 1