. . "Lord Bridge of Harwich"@en . "Lord Templeman"@en . . . "Leases; licenses"@en . . . . . . . . . . . . "Lord Brightman"@en . . . . . . "[1985] UKHL 4, [1985] AC 809; [1985] 2 WLR 877"@en . "23591133"^^ . . . . . . . . "Street v Mountford [1985] UKHL 4 is an English land law case from the House of Lords. It set out principles to determine whether someone who occupied a property had a tenancy (i.e. a lease), or only a licence. This mattered for the purpose of statutory tenant rights to a reasonable rent, and had a wider significance as a lease had \"proprietary\" status and would bind third parties. Lord Templeman held that the defining feature of a lease was exclusive possession, despite the fact that this view had been rejected and heavily criticised in a number of Court of Appeal cases previously, for example in the judgment of Denning LJ in Errington v Errington."@en . "Street v Mountford"@en . . . . "Street v Mountford"@en . . . . "Lord Keith of Kinkel"@en . "Street v Mountford"@en . . . . . . . . . . "9312"^^ . "1082954772"^^ . . "1985-05-02"^^ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "Street v Mountford [1985] UKHL 4 is an English land law case from the House of Lords. It set out principles to determine whether someone who occupied a property had a tenancy (i.e. a lease), or only a licence. This mattered for the purpose of statutory tenant rights to a reasonable rent, and had a wider significance as a lease had \"proprietary\" status and would bind third parties."@en . .