CA 23 May 1990. Appeal by plaintiff (S) against CC decision rejecting claim that the balance of the premium did not fall within one of the exceptions to the Rent Act 1977 s120 . In 1983 the defendants (M) under terms of an agreement in a lease carried out structural repairs to a property at their own expense and were granted a tenancy termed as a protected tenancy by the Rent Act 1977 , In 1987 M assigned the lease to S for 115,000. S later demanded this premium back on the grounds that it was a prohibited premium under the terms of the Rent Act 1977 s120(3)(b). M accepted that 42,000 fell within this category and repaid this amount but agreed that the balance fell within s120(3)(b) as the sum was incurred on structural alterations. S argued that s120(3)(b) applied to expenditure incurred by M after lease had been assigned whilst M contested that the exception should apply to any expenditure. The CC ruling was upheld on the basis that s120(3)(b) was not restricted to expenditure incu