Lease Structure and Content — SQE1 practice question

A woman owns two properties in England. One is a flat let to a tenant who has lived there for three years under an assured tenancy; the other is a shop let to a retailer on a ten-year lease granted last year, which was not contracted out of the security of tenure provisions. She wants both back at the end of next year so that she can redevelop the site, and assumes that she can simply give each tenant notice that the term is over.

Which of the following best describes the security of tenure of the two tenants?

Option A. Incorrect answer. Both tenants are protected by the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, and neither may be removed without a court order.
Option B. Correct answer. The residential tenant can be removed only on a statutory ground; the shop tenant has 1954 Act protection.Correct
Option C. Incorrect answer. The shop tenant has the stronger protection, its lease being much the longer of the two terms.
Option D. Incorrect answer. Neither has security of tenure, so notice ending each term will recover possession.
Option E. Incorrect answer. The residential tenant has no security of tenure; only the shop tenant is statutorily protected.

Why

The correct answer is B. The two sectors run on entirely separate statutory tracks. The flat is held on an assured tenancy under the Housing Act 1988, and since the Renters' Rights Act 2025 came into force on 1 May 2026 the assured shorthold tenancy and the section 21 "no-fault" notice have gone: every assured tenancy is periodic, and possession can be recovered only by establishing one of the statutory grounds in Schedule 2, on a section 8 notice, with an order of the court. Wanting the property back in order to redevelop is not a matter of serving notice that the term has ended; she must find a ground that fits her facts and prove it. The shop is held on a tenancy to which Part II of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 applies, the parties not having contracted out before the lease was granted. That tenancy does not simply expire with the term: it continues until brought to an end in the manner the Act prescribes, and the tenant is entitled to a new tenancy unless the landlord makes out a statutory ground of opposition - redevelopment being the obvious candidate here, with compensation payable to the tenant if that is the only ground made out.

A is incorrect because the 1954 Act governs business tenancies; it does not apply to a dwelling let and occupied as such. C is incorrect because security of tenure turns on which statutory regime applies, not on the length of the term. D is incorrect because both tenants are protected, though by different legislation and different machinery. E is incorrect because it inverts the residential position: since the 2025 Act the assured tenant is more secure than before, not less.