The landlord owned two adjoining commercial properties. The tenant of one proposed to assign the lease to the tenant of the adjoining property. The landlord refused consent on the ground that if the assignment went ahead, it was likely that the assignee would terminate its tenancy of the adjoining property, which the landlord would have difficulty reletting.
Held: Discussing the matters which a landlord may take into account when refusing to consent to an assignment of a lease: ‘in a case of this kind the reason must be something affecting the subject matter of the contract which forms the relationship between the landlord and the tenant, and . . it must not be something wholly extraneous and completely dissociated from the subject matter of the contract.’
Judges:
Sargant LJ, Warrington LJ
Citations:
[1925] Ch 575
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Applied – Bates v Donaldson CA 1896
The landlord had refused consent to an assignment of the lease to a respectable and responsible prospective tenant, for the reason that the landlord wished to place commercial pressure on the existing tenant to surrender the lease to the landlord. . .
Cited by:
Cited – Ashworth Frazer Limited v Gloucester City Council HL 8-Nov-2001
A lease contained a covenant against assignment without the Landlord’s consent, such consent not to be unreasonably withheld. The tenant asserted, pace Killick, that the landlord could not refuse consent on the grounds that the proposed tenant might . .
Cited – Ashworth Frazer Ltd v Gloucester City Council CA 3-Feb-2000
A landlord could not refuse to consent to an assignment because of a belief, even if reasonably based, that the intended use by the prospective assignee would be a breach of covenant under the lease. That did not mean that a landlord could not after . .
Cited – Sargeant, and Sargeant v Macepark (Whittlebury) Limited ChD 8-Jun-2004
The landlord granted the tenant a licence to make alterations to the property, but imposed conditions on the use to be made of the resulting premises. The tenant objected.
Held: The landlord was entitled when granting consent to take into . .
Cited – Lambert v FW Woolworth and Co Ltd CA 1938
The court considered the reasonableness of the withholding of consent under the Act: ‘the landlords have unconditionally withheld their consent and made no condition as to payment of any compensation in respect of damage to or diminution in the . .
Cited – NCR Ltd v Riverland Portfolio No.1 Ltd ChD 16-Jul-2004
The tenant complained that the landlord had unreasonably delayed approval of a proposed underletting.
Held: The court had to bear in mind that the consent was to an underlease, and that therefore there was no privity between the landlord and . .
Cited – International Drilling Fluids v Louisville Investments (Uxbridge) Ltd CA 20-Nov-1985
Consent to Assignment Unreasonably Withheld
The landlord had refused a proposed assignment of office premises from a tenant who had occupied the premises as its permanent offices, to a tenant who proposed to use the premises as serviced offices – that is, for short-term rent to others. The . .
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 . .
Limited (obiter) – Viscount Tredegar v Harwood HL 1929
Landlord’s reserved right to approve insurer
A covenant in the lease required the lessee to insure the premises with a nominated insurer or another insurer approved by the lessor. The lessor refused to approve a responsible and reputable insurer because of his wish that all tenants insure with . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Landlord and Tenant
Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.187991