CA 21 December 2000. The claimant (C) surrendered the lease of a restaurant to the first defendant landlord (I), who then granted a new lease to Mr & Mrs B (B) who in turn agreed to pay C for the business in instalments. When B failed to pay certain instalments C obtained summary judgement against them and, later, two charging orders which were registered pursuant to the Land Charges Act 1972. After the lease was forfeited for arrears of rent a new lease was granted to the second (U) and third (F) defendants. C then brought an application, which was dismissed, for relief from forfeiture whilst an injunction was granted against U on cross-undertakings in damages by the C in an action bought by B against U and F regarding the ownership of chattels. C and U appealed. "Held": The appeal was allowed in the forfeiture action, on the grounds that as an equitable chargee of a lease forfeited for non-payment C could seek relief indirectly as there was an implied obligation on the chargor to take reasonable steps to preserve the chargee's security, but dismissed in the chattels action.