FIVE tenant farmers are locked in legal battles and hundreds more also face losing their homes and livelihoods after a court ruling that upholds landlords' rights to evict tenant farmers.

It is understood the individual farmers are involved in cases similar to one that was partly blamed for the death of tenant farmer Andrew Riddell, who took his own life when he faced eviction.

Mr Riddell, 52, of Peaston Farm, Ormiston, East Lothian, was given notice to quit by his landlord Alastair Salvesen despite his family having farmed the land for more than 100 years.

He was in a specific type of "limited partnership" lease and had tenure but the Supreme Court said the measures put in place to protect tenants in such areas were not compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights.

The ruling put a question mark over the future of about 500 Scottish farmers who are in such partnerships and the Scottish Government was also ordered to overhaul its "incompetent" law.

Holyrood now has to rewrite legislation it introduced in 2003 to to help tenant farmers, as the judges ruled it partly breached human rights rules.

The clause in contention barred landlords from evicting tenants while the legislation was going through parliament.

The Scottish Government –which had appealed the criticism of its law – said it is now working to fix the clause in order to prevent any retrospective appeals.

However, farmers in limited partnerships could be in limbo for up to a year as they await the changes to the Holyrood legislation and one expert warned more wrangles are expected.

Aberdeen-based lawyer Hamish Lean, of Stronachs, said there are currently five other cases like Mr Riddell's, although not all are being dealt with by his firm, and more could emerge.

He said: "I must have had dozens of tenant farmers come to me since the 2003 Act came into force."

He said most farmers feared facing years of litigation while they fought for land their family had sometimes worked for decades.

He said: "My business is likely to have more clients depending on how the legislation is amended."

One farmer in a limited partnership, who asked not to be named, said many were concerned. He said: "I will have nothing else to lose if I have to leave [the farm] and whatever I do I will be starting again from nothing."

The London-based Supreme Court's decision in April provoked anger and came after Mr Riddell, who had been given notice to quit, was found dead last year.

More than 400 people attended a service in memory of Mr Riddell, after his death last autumn.

His body was found after he had harvested his final crop.

The Scottish Tenant Farmers' Association has said "tenants must not be penalised further".

A Scottish Government spokesman said: "The reason the then minister and parliament included the relevant bit of the Act was to stabilise the sector by preventing individuals from being able to circumvent the intention of the Act by terminating limited partnerships during the course of the Bill, as was a real risk at the time (the intention of the Act being to convert limited partnership tenancy-type arrangements into proper regulated tenancies).

"The court ruling confirms that including anti-circumvention provisions is a perfectly legitimate thing for Parliament to do – it was the detail of the anti- circumvention provision, not the principle, which the court ruled against.

"Due to that complexity and the technical nature of the legislation and private commercial arrangements between individuals we will require to give careful, detailed consideration to legal solutions available to resolve this judgment. This consideration will take some time and will be undertaken in partnership with stakeholders and the Scottish Parliament."