The tenant complained that the landlord had unreasonably withheld its consent to a proposed assignment.
Held: The landlords were not acting unreasonably in refusing consent on grounds which were unexceptionable. Judge Finlay QC said: ‘The landlords here are, in my judgment, entitled to consider the likely effect upon their ability to let other parts of the property and, indeed, to obtain the appropriate rents for their other property in the centre. At all material times there was a high likelihood, now shown to be a certainty, that the assignee would not keep the store open and the landlords are entitled to consider the effect which that would have upon their ability not only to let the other property in the centre but to obtain satisfactory rents for them.’
Judge Finlay QC
[1987] 1 EGLR 53
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Norwich Union Life Insurance Society v Shopmoor Ltd ChD 10-Apr-1997
The tenants had applied for a licence to assign the property. The landlords had prevaricated, and the judge found their delay unreasonable and that it amounted to an unreasonable withholding of consent. They now appealed.
Held: The 1988 Act . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Landlord and Tenant
Updated: 23 December 2021; Ref: scu.263800