[2007] EWHC 744 (Ch), 30 March 2007. The defendant sub tenant had taken assignment of a lease. The rent review clause stated that on review the rent was the higher of the passing rent and the open market yearly rent. The review was referred to the independent expert second defendant for determination. Clause 3.13 of the lease stated that the landlord's written licence to assign the whole of the demised premises should not be unreasonably withheld, subject to the landlord's entitlement to require a surety in certain circumstances. "Held": clause 3.13 set out the agreement of the parties as to what alienations were not absolutely prohibited and could be made with consent and accordingly restrict the circumstances in which a tenant could properly apply for consent to an assignment. It did not set out a condition which the landlord could impose for the giving of consent to an assignment nor did it set out a circumstance in which a refusal of consent was deemed to be reasonable. It did not set out a condition which the landlord could impose for the giving of consent to an assignment nor did it set out a circumstance in which a refusal of consent was deemed to be reasonable.