Graham v Price
| Jurisdiction | Barbados |
| Judge | Williams, C.J.,Chase J. |
| Judgment Date | 06 April 1990 |
| Court | Divisional Court (Barbados) |
| Docket Number | No. 47 of 1989 |
| Date | 06 April 1990 |
Divisional Court
Williams, C.J.; Chase J.
No. 47 of 1989
Mr. V. Smith for the appellant.
Mr. B. Layne for the respondent.
Practice and procedure - Appeals — Appellant appealing against notice to quit from defendant based on the fact that the notice did not conform to the prescribed form — Notice deemed a nullity
This is an appeal by Velda Graham against an order made by a magistrate at District “A” requiring her to vacate a house-spot on or before June 22, 1986. The material facts appear from the magistrate's Reasons:
“A notice to quit dated 25th April 1983 was served on the defendant (Graham) requiring her to vacate on the 25th October, 1983. A notice of intention to apply to the magistrate for recovery of possession dated 11th January 1984 was served on the defendant. The plaint alleges that the plaintiff is the landlord of the defendant. No defence has been filed by the defendant.
The plaintiff's evidence is that he let to the defendant a house-spot in 1975. The defendant paid him rent until she was served a notice to quit in 1983. The rent book has been produced. [Exhibit S P 1].”
Mr. V.O. Smith in support of the appeal submits that the notice to quit was a nullity for two reasons: first, it did not substantially conform to the prescribed form and, second, it was a quarterly tenancy and the notice was not timed to coincide with the end of a quarterly period.
Mr. Layne for St. Clair Price, the respondent, submits that the imperfection of the notice was a procedural matter of no fundamental importance and that there is no evidence on which it can be said that it was a quarterly tenancy.
“House-spot” is defined in the Security of Tenure of Small Holdings Act Cap. 237 to mean “any parcel of land comprised in a contract of tenancy made (whether or not the contract of tenancy expressly so provides) in contemplation of the land being used solely as a site for a chattel building and the curtilage appurtenant thereto for use of the tenant, as a dwelling or as a place of business; “contract of tenancy” to mean a letting or sub-letting of land or agreement for letting or sub-letting land, for a term certain or for any periodic tenancy, and includes a licence to occupy land; and “tenant” to mean the holder of land under a contract of tenancy and as including the executors, administrators, assigns or other persons deriving title from a tenant.
It seems to us from the evidence in the case that this was a contract of tenancy of a house-spot within the above-mentioned statute.
Section 9 (1) enacts inter alia, that, subject to the Act, the tenancy of a house-spot shall not terminate until such time as it is determined by notice in accordance with Part III of the Act but shall continue until that time on the terms of the contract of tenancy relating thereto so far as the same are applicable.
Section 11 (1) provides, inter alia, that, subject to the Act, either party to a contract of tenancy of a house-spot may terminate the tenancy by giving to the other party in accordance with the Act not...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hood v Edwards
...for the termination of the tenancy or set out the area of land held by the tenant. In support of his contention, he cited Graham v. Price, BB 1990 DC 1 where the court held that these “deviations materially affected the substance of the form which the statute required and nullified the noti......