Norwich Livestock Market Ltd, R (On the Application Of) v Norwich City Council

In 2012 the Council granted an underlease of the site to the Claimant for a term commencing on 1 October 2009 and expiring on 30 September 2014. Since the expiry of this lease the Claimant has been holding over but it has the protection of Part 2 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954. It appears that Mr Dacre would like to redevelop the Hall Road site for other purposes. He owns a smaller 2 acre site to the south which he is prepared to make available as an alternative site for the cattle market.

This is disputed on the facts by the Council. However it is accepted by Mr Parker on their behalf that there would certainly be an issue as to whether the requirements to be met by a bidder wanting to occupy the alternative site are unduly onerous and he does not argue that this Claim should fail solely on the ground that, even if there has been error of law, the Court should for that reason and in its discretion decline to grant any remedy.

Mr Litton has however drawn attention to schedule 3 as indicative of an acknowledgement by the Council that, despite having disposed of their property interest in the Hall Road site, they have continuing obligations under the 1984 Act.

Mr Parker submits that there has been no de facto discontinuance of the Cattle Market by the disposal of the Council’s property interest in the Hall Road site and if, for any reason, the alternative site in Mr Dacre’s ownership does prove unsuitable, the Council would have a statutory obligation to provide an alternative site for the market somewhere else before discontinuing the Cattle Market at the Hall Road site.

The reason it is said by Mr Litton that the surrender of the head lease amounts to a discontinuance of the Cattle Market at the existing site, notwithstanding the fact that the Claimant continues to operate a livestock market from that site, is that this is the effect of section 8 of the 1984 Act. This provides as follows: