Clarke v Grant ([1950] 1 K.B. 104, CA Eng) concerned a yearly tenancy. The landlord served notice to quit but then accepted rent paid in advance. The question was whether the landlord was therefore unable to rely on the notice to quit. The English Court of Appeal held that this was not the case and that the notice still brought the lease to an end:
Lord Goddard C.J. said:
‘if a notice to quit has been given in respect of a periodic tenancy such as a yearly tenancy, the result is to bring the tenancy to an end just as effectually as if there had been a term which had expired. Therefore, when a landlord has brought a tenancy to an end by means of a notice to quit, a payment of rent after that date will only operate in favour of the tenant if it can be shown that the parties intended that there should be a new tenancy. A new tenancy must be created.’ (105 – 106)
There was no evidence of an intention to create a new tenancy here.
