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 did not make clear that a tenant faced with a delay could nevertheless complete the assignment. The landlord has a statutory duty to the tenant within a reasonable time to give consent, except in a case where it is reasonable not to give consent. In judging whether it is reasonable not to give consent, the position is tested by reference to the state of affairs at the expiry of the reasonable time. The landlord having shown no arguable defence,the tenant had been free to complete the assignment.
The tenant had itself appealed a finding that the landlord had been correct to withold consent to a subletting at a low rent where the landlord felt that this would affect its ability to negotiate rents for other properties locally. To allow the landlord to seek to control rents on subleases where it had no direct interest would give it too much power. The tenant’s appeal on this point succeeded.
Judges:
Sir Richard Scott VC
Citations:
[1997] EWHC Ch 368, [1999] 1 WLR 531, [1998] 2 EGLR 167, [1998] 3 All ER 32
Links:
Statutes:
Landlord and Tenant Act 1988 1(3)
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Bromley Park Garden Estates Ltd v Moss CA 1982
When considering whether to give consent to an assignment of a lease, the landlord need consider only his own interests.
Slade LJ said: ‘I find it rather more surprising that, when the landlords came subsequently to question the validity of . .
Cited – City Hotels Group Ltd v Total Property Investments Ltd 6-Jul-1984
The landlords had received a request for a consent to a proposed assignment of the lease. They did not, in terms, refused consent, but had not given it notwithstanding a considerable passage of time and lengthy correspondence. The court was asked . .
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 – FW Woolworth plc v Charlwood Alliance Properties Ltd ChD 1987
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 . .
Cited – Houlder Brothers and Co Ltd v Gibbs CA 1925
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 . .
Cited – Bickel v Duke of Westminster CA 1977
The freeholder had refused consent to an assignment of the head lease of a house to a lady who, if she had become tenant under the head lease for five years, would have been entitled to buy the freehold from the Estate. The existing tenant was a . .
Cited – West Layton Ltd v Ford; West Layton Ltd v Joseph and Another CA 12-Feb-1979
When considering whether to consent to an assignment of a lease, a landlord need consider only his own interests. . .
Cited – Bromley Park Garden Estates Ltd v Moss CA 1982
When considering whether to give consent to an assignment of a lease, the landlord need consider only his own interests.
Slade LJ said: ‘I find it rather more surprising that, when the landlords came subsequently to question the validity of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Landlord and Tenant
Updated: 17 July 2022; Ref: scu.263760