Jackson LJ condemns 'massive legal fees' in sandwich shop battle

Lord Justice Jackson has condemned the ‘massive legal fees and expert costs’ resulting from a battle over a Stockport sandwich shop.

Delivering judgment at the Court of Appeal, he awarded the evicted tenant, Sheila Grange, just over £9,000 in damages.

The court heard that Grange took a lease of the shop in Stockport for six years, with the landlords, Mr and Mrs Quinn, living upstairs.

Grange was wrongly evicted, on grounds that were not serious enough to constitute a breach of the lease, such as failing to keep the windows clean. The landlords also failed to a give the necessary notices terminating the lease under the Law of Property Act 1925.

Giving the majority judgment in Grange v Quinn [2013] EWCA Civ 24, Lord Justice Jackson said: “It is not necessary to embark upon detailed calculations in order to see whether the claimant paid too much for the lease and goodwill of the sandwich shop.

“The starting point for assessing damages is the purchase price which the claimant paid, namely £9,950. It would be manifestly unjust if the defendants could evict the claimant after only six months and still keep the purchase price.”

Jackson LJ agreed with Mrs Justice Gloster that the claimant needed to deduct only £871 from the original premium paid “for the benefit which she has received before the unlawful eviction”.

He added: “Parties need to be able to assess their rights and liabilities without incurring massive legal fees and expert costs as has occurred in this case.”

He ruled that Grange’s appeal should be allowed and awarded damages of £9,079. “An award of damages in that sum meets the justice of this case,” he said. “It accords with both principle and precedent.”

Lady Justice Gloster agreed, but Lady Justice Arden dissented.

Arden LJ said the “relevant question” was whether Grange would have walked away at the end of the lease with a profit above the amount of the premium.

She said the recorder was not satisfied that the business would have been profitable over the period of the lease and that Grange would not have made enough profit to cover the premium.

Colin Fenny, an associate at Lancashire firm Harrison Drury, acted for Grange. He said the firm acted on a conditional fee basis because of her limited means.

“If commercial landlords wish to enforce their rights under the lease, it is vital they take professional legal advice before taking any pre-emptive steps because – as this case shows – the financial consequences can be enormous,” Fenny said.

“From a commercial tenant’s perspective, it is equally important to contact a solicitor without delay if your landlord takes, or threatens to take, enforcement action against you because time is very much of the essence in these cases.”