Abstract/Summary

Argues that the controversial "Bruton tenancies" created by the House of Lords decision in Bruton v London & Quadrant Housing Trust should be seen as a form of proprietary tenancy. Discusses the view that those without an estate in land are prevented by the nemo dat principle from granting a lease, the scope for tenancies derived from equitable interests, and the challenges to Bruton tenancies posed by the Court of Appeal ruling in Milmo v Carreras. Explains how Bruton tenancies create a circumscribed proprietary interest in land, best understood through the concept of relativity of title.