[2002] EWCA Civ 177, 25 February 2002. Appeal by the claimant (A) against the dismissal of its claim for a declaration that it had lawfully rescinded a contract for the assignment to it of the defendant's (L) leasehold interest in certain premises and was consequently entitled to the return of its 5% deposit paid on exchange of contracts. The lease contained a prohibition on assignment save with the landlord's consent in writing (not to be unreasonably withheld). It was held that the consent did not have to be in writing for the purposes of the Standard Conditions of Sale third edition - condition 8.3.4.and had in fact been sufficiently given in the correspondence even though the formal licence to assign was not to hand. "Held" appeal dismissed. Consent by correspondence for the purposes of condition 8.3.4 even if subject to licence or to other conditions agreed but not necessarily fulfilled by the completion date, could amount to consent to the assignment. In this case consent was clearly contained in the correpsondence and consent had been given well outside the three working days prescribed limit. View judgment at www.courtservice.gov.uk/.