Landlord Protect Ltd v St Anselm Development Company Ltd: CA 20 Feb 2009

Guarantee beyond term was unreasonable

The tenant objected that the landlord’s conditional consent to an assignment was unreasonable. The purchaser was a dormant company which had never traded. The clause referred to ‘a respectable and responsible assignee or sub-tenant’. The tenant had itself offered a conditional guarantee.
Held: A lessor cannot normally reasonably require a guarantor of the liabilities of an assignee to undertake a liability extending beyond the period during which the term is vested in the assignee. Such a requirement increases or enhances the rights the lessor enjoys under the lease. Here the requirement was unreasonable.

Stanley Burnton LJ, Waller LJ, Wilson LJ
[2009] EWCA Civ 99, Times 02-Mar-2009, [2009] 19 EG 112, [2009] 2 P and CR 9, [2009] 8 EG 115, [2009] NPC 47
Landlord and Tenant Act 1988 1(6)(b)
England and Wales
CitedInternational 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 . .
CitedStraudley Investments Limited v Mount Eden Land Limited CA 7-Oct-1996
In considering a refusal of consent to a sub-letting, two considerations in addition to those already esatblished in law applied: ‘(1) It will normally be reasonable for a landlord to refuse consent or impose a condition if this is necessary to . .
Appeal fromLandlord Protect Ltd v St Anselm Development Company Ltd ChD 8-Jul-2008
. .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 09 November 2021; Ref: scu.301652