Chd 7 November 1996. K was granted a lease of a warehouse, whose reversion was later transfered to X. K granted an underlease to the first defendants, H, under which H covenanted with the landlords to keep the premises in good repair. In 1993 H assigned the underlease to the second defendant, T, and also in 1993 the plaintiff, Z, acquired the reversion of the headlease. In February 1996 Z served notice on T requiring them to carry out certain repairs, however one month later T vacated the premises, surrendering the underlease, and Z forfeited the headlease. Z commenced proceedings against H and T seeking a declaration that they were liable to pay for the repairs. A preliminary issue was tried as to whether Z was entitled to enforce the covenants against the defendants. It was held that Z was not entitled to enforce these as the Law of Property Act 1925 s56(1) did not operate to confer the benefit of a covenant on a party who was not within the ambit of the identified covenantee.