Assignation of Agricultural Tenancies in Scotland: Changes Afoot
by Peter Misselbrook and Stuart Greenwood
The word ‘radical’ has been used by both supporters and critics
alike when commenting on the various proposals set out by the Scottish
Government in the Land Reform (Scotland) Bill. This gives a flavour of the tone
of the debate. Both sides have also been particularly vocal on the previously
little discussed topic of succession and assignation of secure agricultural
tenancies. The implications of the proposals are discussed in this
briefing.
A secure agricultural tenancy (also known as a ‘1991 Act
tenancy’) is a tenancy of a farm which can continue indefinitely, from
generation to generation, and the tenant does not have to vacate the farm on
any termination date stated in the Lease.
Conversion to a Modern Limited Duration Tenancy
As part of its remit, the Agricultural Holdings Review Group,
who published their findings last year (and whose proposal we previously
commented on) suggested that a tenant farmer should be entitled to convert
their tenancy to a new Modern Limited Duration Tenancy (MLDT) for a fixed
duration and then to assign it for value to a third party. This proposal was
designed to help those farmers who did not have a successor to take over their
secure tenancy under the current legislation. It was also aimed at striking a
balance between the landlord’s property rights (since the new tenancy would no
longer continue indefinitely, but would eventually come to an end on its
termination date) and providing means for the tenant to retire with dignity, so
enhancing the tenanted sector overall.
‘Assignation for value’
While the Review Group’s widely consulted proposal was
originally contained in the first draft of the Land Reform Bill, the Scottish
Government has, as a reaction to those who criticised the Bill as not going far
enough, proposed an ‘assignation for value’model. This mechanism would permit a
tenant under a secure tenancy to assign that tenancy to another party without
converting it to a fixed duration tenancy, but with the landlord having the
option of buying out the tenancy before it was assigned.
This proposal has resulted in much comment from both sides of
the debate and, policy considerations and personal views aside, it has a number
of interesting legal implications - particularly due to its general
application. The original proposal to convert secure tenancies to MLDTs was
designed to be a means to permit succession where a tenant farmer had no near
relative successors. While not expressly limited to those particular
circumstances, and therefore freely available to all tenants at all times, this
option was unlikely to be used by tenants without good reason - since security
of tenure would be lost and the tenancy converted to one of a fixed
duration.
Similarly, the’assignation for value’ proposal also affects any
tenant and can be exercised at any time. However, it may be far more attractive
as there is no drawback of losing security of tenure.
A move away from delectus personae
Historically, secure agricultural tenancies were subject to
delectus personae – meaning that the tenant farmer was chosen precisely because
of their personal identity - their skills, local knowledge and ability to farm
the land. The landowner trusted them with a significant asset, and the
particular identity of the tenant was very important. That tenant could
therefore not transfer the tenancy to another party without the landowner’s
permission. This position was later qualified by the succession and assignation
provisions to allow a secure tenancy to be passed on to a fixed class of near
relatives. The possible justification for this change was that the same family
may continue to farm the land with the same practices and on the basis of
previous relationships between the families of the landlord and the tenant
(although such relationships may not always have been positive). Indeed, the
fact that the same family has often occupied or farmed the same area of ground
under a tenancy for a number of generations is often cited, by those calling
for further protection of tenants.
Read More Here:
http://www.shepwedd.co.uk/sites/default/files/Assignation_of_agricultural_tenancies.pdf