Reversing the trend
Series: Estates Gazette ; (0439) 25 September 2004, 133(1)Publication details: 2004Subject(s): Summary: The right to sublet is often restricted or even prohibited by a covenant in a tenant's lease. Compares two different approaches taken by the courts with regards to consideration of subletting by tenants. In "Homebase Ltd and another v Allied Dunbar Assurance plc" ([2002] EWCA Civ 666, Abs65740), the CA agreed with the landlord's contention that the proposed sublease did not comply with the required preconditions. However in "NCR Ltd v Riverland Portfolio No 1 Ltd ([2004] EWHC 921, [2004] 16 EG 110(CS)) the payment of a reverse premium was accepted as a way of satisfying headlease conditions.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journal article | London Journal article | ABS68360 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 127845-1001 |
The right to sublet is often restricted or even prohibited by a covenant in a tenant's lease. Compares two different approaches taken by the courts with regards to consideration of subletting by tenants. In "Homebase Ltd and another v Allied Dunbar Assurance plc" ([2002] EWCA Civ 666, Abs65740), the CA agreed with the landlord's contention that the proposed sublease did not comply with the required preconditions. However in "NCR Ltd v Riverland Portfolio No 1 Ltd ([2004] EWHC 921, [2004] 16 EG 110(CS)) the payment of a reverse premium was accepted as a way of satisfying headlease conditions.