Provan v Swan & Ors [2001] ScotCS 146 (7 June 2001)

Provan v Swan & Ors [2001] ScotCS 146 (7 June 2001)

The petitioner has established a protected sub-tenancy which has not been properly terminated, and the respondents' possession is unlawful. The company operations affecting purported tenancy are questionable, and no equitable considerations justify modifying the petitioner's legal right to possess.

Citation
[2001] ScotCS 146
Parties
Petitioner: John Provan; Respondents: Charles Swan and Others
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
07 June 2001
Procedural Posture
Petition and Answers / Interim Hearing
Outcome
Interim relief granted in favour of petitioner
Legal Topics
Protected Tenancy, Interdict, Company Operations, Sub Tenancy, Tacit Relocation
Property Law Agricultural Tenancy Law Protected Tenancy Interdict Company Operations Sub Tenancy Tacit Relocation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Provan

Petitioner

Charles Swan and Others

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Petition and Answers / Interim Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the petitioner holds a protected agricultural sub-tenancy
  2. 2 Whether the respondents' possession is lawful
  3. 3 Whether the principal and sub-tenancies have been properly terminated

Ratio Decidendi

The petitioner has established a protected sub-tenancy which has not been properly terminated, and the respondents' possession is unlawful. The company operations affecting purported tenancy are questionable, and no equitable considerations justify modifying the petitioner's legal right to possess.

Court Disposition

Interim relief granted in favour of petitioner

Orders

  • Interim interdict granted as per interlocutor under appeal