000			01436cab a2200181 4500
001			ABS40260
008			090401t1989 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u22603
041			_aeng
245			_aDeverall v Wyndham and Others
260			_c1989
350			_a0
490			_aEstates Gazette _v(1989) 01 EG 70-77(5)
520			_aChD 5 May 1988. The plaintiff tenant (D) sought declarations that the lessors (W) were unreasonable in their refusal to consent to two proposed sublettings by the lessee. D held a lease due to expire in 1992. D occupied the basement and ground floor and applied to sublet the first floor to his son and the second floor to a friend. Neither of the subtenancies would have been protected as long as D continued to be the resident landlord . If, however, D did cease to be a resident before 1992, the subtenancies would become protected and the subtenants would be entitled to remain in possession after the lease had expired. W refused their consent on the ground the value of the reversion would be reduced by protected subtenancies. D sought declarations from the court. It was held that W had unreasonably withheld consent; the judge weighed up the circumstances and concluded that the points in favour of the lessee outweighed those in favour of the lessors. Declarations accordingly.
690			_aLANDLORD AND TENANT-CASE LAW-RESIDENTIAL TENANCIES
942			_n0
948			_c04/03/1997
999			_c15148 _d15148