2nd Division 5 September 1991. A lease clause for office premises provided for assignment with landlords consent and contravention or failure to implement any condition a tenant will forfeit the lease. Consent to sublet was refused. Instead the tenant entered into an agreement with a third party to provide `services and facilities` which included `the use of an office room`. The third party agreed not to impede the tenant in the exercise of his rights of possession and control of the office. The landlord purported to irritate the lease on the basis that the property had been sublet. The matter was referred to arbitration. The arbitor held that the property had been sublet. The tenant appealed on the grounds that the third party were business lodgers sharing accommodation. Held, the agreement was a sublease as it had only been drawn up in the terms mentioned to avoid needing landlords consent.