Mrs Tunstall claimed that the company was now carrying on the business, rather than Mrs Steigmann as the landlord, and because the company was a separate legal person, Mrs Steigmann did not have the right to repossession under the statute.
The company was now carrying on the business, rather than Mrs Steigmann as the landlord. This was what Mrs Tunstall claimed. Mrs Steigmann did not have the right to repossession under the statute. The company was a separate legal person.