[2009] EWCH 77 (Ch), 23 January 2009. The case is probably the first occasion on which the courts were required to consider the implications of a virtual lease assignment in the context of a claim for the alleged breach of a tenant's alienation covenants in a commercial lease. A claimant landlord (L) sought a declaration that the defendant tenant (T) had acted in breach of covenants in its lease by entering into a 'virtual assignment' of the premises with a third party. T transferred all the economic benefits and burdens of a commercial lease to a third party, but did not actually assign the leasehold interest or a change in occupancy. Held: declaration granted in favour of claimant. The virtual assignment was not in breach of the covenants restricting (1) underletting, (2) assignment (Akici v LR Bultin Ltd applied) or (3) executions of declarations of trust. However, it was in breach of the covenant restricting the parting with or sharing of possession of the premises. The definition of 'possession' under the Law of Property Act 1925 S205 denoted an appropriate degree of physical control of the premises, but the virtual assignment passed control of the property. Abbey National PLC v Customs and Excise Commissioners considered.