[2005] EWHC 2391 (TCC), 4 Nov 2005. Concerns the interpretation of a break clause contained in a lease of commercial premises jointly owned by the claimant landlord (FZ) and occupied by the defendant tenant (FT). The break clause allowed FT to terminate the lease by a notice served at least 13 months prior to the break date of 1 April 2004 so long as the tenant had materially complied with all its lease obligations down to 1 April 2004. FT served a termination notice on 5 February 2003 so as to break the lease on 1 April 2004 and carried out substantial works to comply with the repairing covenants in the lease. FZ contended that FT was in breach as the premises remained in disrepair, that the lease was not broken and that FT owed unpaid rent and other outgoings for the period after 1 April 2004. The court had to determine if FT had materially complied with its repairing obligations and whether it had successfully terminated its lease. "Held": judgment in favour of FT. FT had materially complied with all its obligations on 1 April 2004 and therefore succeeded in breaking the lease and determining it on that date.