ChD 6 February 1998. M is landlord of a building where each of the defendants is a tenant. The leases provide for M to keep the window frames in repair, subject to recovery of the cost through the service charge, and for the defendant tenants to maintain the glass in the windows. In December 1997 a contract was placed to refurbish the exterior of the building, including replacement of the existing rusted single glazed window frames with double glazed units. By November 1997 both defendants objected to the replacement, contending that it went beyond the meaning of repair, and M should not have access to their premises to carry out the repair. The writ was issued in January 1998. "Held" The additional cost of using window frames that would take double glazing and the cost of installing two panes of glass was of a comparatively trivial amount and the alterations did not constitute renewal. A mandatory injunction was granted.