The lease released the landlord from his liability to repair after his assignment of the reversion. It appealed a finding that the provision was void under the 1995 Act, saying the clause was a personal covenant not caught by the Act.
Held: The covenant could not successfully proclaim itself both personal and binding on a successor in title: ‘the distinction between a personal covenant and a ‘landlord’s covenant’ within the meaning of section 6 of the 1995 Act is that a ‘landlord’s covenant’ is one which is binding on the landlord’s successors in title, whereas, by definition, a covenant which is personal to the landlord does not bind his successors’. The appeal failed.
Judges:
Lord Justice Pill Lord Justice Parker The Honourable Mr Justice Hooper
Citations:
[2004] EWCA Civ 1306, [2005] 1 WLR 236
Links:
Statutes:
Landlord and Tenant (Covenants) Act 1995
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – BHP Petroleum Great Britain Ltd v Chesterfield Properties Ltd and another CA 30-Nov-2001
The claimant granted a lease to the respondents, and then assigned the reversion to another company. It gave notice to the tenant of its desire to be released from its obligations as landlord. The tenant did not serve any counter-notice. Defects . .
Cited by:
Appeal from – London Diocesan Fund and others v Avonridge Property Company Ltd and Phithwa HL 1-Dec-2005
The defendant had taken on a lease of a parade of shops, and sub-let each shop for a full premium at a nominal rent. It sought to limit its own liability to pay the head rent by limiting the covenant in the sub-leases to pay the head rent to the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Landlord and Tenant
Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.216418
