Mundy v Hook [1997]

The tenant agreed to rent a house from the landlord, and the landlord served a Housing Act 1988 section 20 notice on the tenant stating a term of 6 months. However, the tenancy agreement stated that the term would last 6 months.

The tenant also argued that there was confusion as to whether the garage was included or excluded from the demise as, at the request of the landlord, the agreement had been amended to exclude it. The tenant also claimed that there had never been in agreement as to the contents of the agreement, and as it was not signed it was not a valid assured shorthold tenancy.

HELD: The Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge’s findings that the written part of the tenancy agreement did not reflect the intention of the parties (which was for the tenancy to last for 6 months), and ordered it to be rectified.

The Court similarly dismissed the tenant’s argument that this meant that there was no tenancy, holding that there was a valid assured shorthold tenancy as a verbal agreement existed between them and whether or not the garage was included was simply a matter of construction.

The tenant had entered into possession with the landlord’s consent and had paid rent, and the judge had been correct in granting an order that the tenancy agreement be rectified.

Citation: Mundy v Hook [1997] EGCS 119