The Gazette 1981

GAZETTE

DECE M BE R 1981

playing rugby football on the terms of the agreement of 14 July 1956; (c) Damages for trespass; (d) Further and other relief. The Defendants alleged that: (a) The agreement of 14 July 1956 was not a lease but only a licence; (b) That the Plaintiffs did not at all times comply with the covenants and conditions contained in the agreement; (c) That the Plaintiffs did not at all times pay the annual rent provided for; (d) Further and other relief, serious and continual breach of the covenants and other terms of the agreement; and (e) That the Plaintiffs had used the field for periods in excess of those envisaged by the agree- ment and had failed to maintain the playing pitch and its sur- rounds and to keep them properly cut and maintained and that notices of these breaches had been repeatedly given to the Plaintiffs and that undertakings had been received to the effect that there would be no repetition of these breaches. The Defendants counterclaimed that

(ii) Generally speaking, where the forfeiture was only for securing payment or where there was no injury from the delay in payment or only such injury that the payment of a sum for interest, and, if needs be, costs, would be full compensation for it, relief would not be refused. The excessive use of the premises and certain damage done to the grass by the use of a corrosive substance in the laying of lines of demarcation of the pitch could in the circumstances be so compensated. Equitable relief against forfeiture was granted on terms for the payment of arrears of rent and an undertaking by the Plain- tiffs to comply in future with the terms and conditions contained in agreement of 14 July 1956. Judd and others, as trustees of Bective Rugby Football Club v. McAlinden and others, as trustees of Merrion Cricket Club. High Court (per Hamilton J.) - 28 March 1980 — unreported.

they had also terminated the agreement by re-entering in or about the month of February 1975 and that by notice dated 25 February 1975, they required the Plaintiffs not to re- enter the lands and counterclaimed: (a) For a declaration that they had lawfully terminated the licence and were entitled to exclude the Plaintiffs from the lands; (b) Arrears of rent to the date of ter- mination; (c) £1,000 damages for the Plaintiffs' breaches of covenants and other terms and conditions of the agreement. At the hearing of the action, counsel for the Plaintiffs had applied for and was granted leave to amend the Plaintiffs' reply and defence to counterclaim by including a claim for relief against forfeiture. Held (per Hamilton J.): that the agreement in writing of 14 July 1956 was not a lease but merely a licence which had been determined by for- feiture but that the principles with re- gard to the granting or withholding of equitable relief applied to the facts of the case, such that: (i) Regard must be had to the con- duct of the licencee (i.e. the Plaintiffs); and

Summaries of judgments prepared by Frank Daly, Eugene Davy, Peter Polden and Michael Roche and edited by Michael V. O'Mahony.

SKYPAK International Ireland Ltd. 143 Lower Drumcondra Road, Dublin 9. Telephone 376758 - 378371. Telex: 31312. ft Couriers to the Legal World, ft Specialist in Document Handling.

viii