The Supreme Court has ruled that a company seeking a new business tenancy for a large warehouse property on Sir John Rogerson’s Quay in Dublin had to satisfy the statutory occupation and business-use requirements at the date its existing lease expired.
Twil Limited occupied about 38,000 square feet of warehouse and yard space under a 28-year lease which ended on January 31, 1998. It operated a transport and warehousing business from the premises.
The dispute arose because parts of the property had been sub-let during the three years before the lease expired. Twil argued that its right to a new tenancy had already crystallised once it had completed any three-year period of continuous business occupation during the lease, potentially as far back as 1983.
The Supreme Court rejected that interpretation of section 13 of the Landlord and Tenant (Amendment) Act 1980.
Mr Justice Fennelly held that the phrase “at any time” in the section had to be read in the context and purpose of the legislation. The relevant date was the termination of the existing tenancy because the legislation protected continuing business equity rather than a historic period of occupation disconnected from the end of the lease.
The court also rejected Twil’s argument that occupation by a sub-tenant should count as occupation by the tenant. It held that the legislation required the premises to have been continuously occupied during the qualifying three years by the person who was tenant at the end of that period, or by that tenant’s predecessor in title.
Occupation under certain licence arrangements was different. The parties agreed that where customers merely stored goods in designated areas under licences, Twil remained in business occupation of those areas.
The ruling answered the Circuit Court’s legal questions but did not itself grant or refuse a new tenancy over particular parts of the premises. That remained for the Circuit Court to determine using the Supreme Court’s interpretation.