000			01786cam a2200241 4500
001			ABS66451
008			030224n2003 000 0 eng u
035			_a(Sirsi) u121412
100			_aMurdoch, S.
245			_aNo guaranteed answer
260			_c2003
490			_aEstates Gazette _v(0306) 8 February 2003, 143(1)
520			_aDiscusses the basic legal principles governing the granting of licenses to assign leases. Refers to two recent cases highlighting the problems encountered over the assigning of leases. In "Mount Eden Land Ltd v Towerstone Ltd" (ChD [2002] 31 EG 97(CS)) the judge held that, where the requirement for a surety is a precondition to the right to assign and is at the discretion of the landlord, there is no need for reasonableness. In this instance the landlord was reasonable in refusing to accept the guarantor. In contrast "London and Argyll Developments Ltd v Mount Cook Land Ltd" (ChD [2002] 50 EG 111(CS)) highlighted the principle that where insistence upon a surety is a condition of a consent that is required to be reasonable, the landlord can only rely upon written reasons given to the tenant at the time the condition is imposed. Principles set out in "Footwear Corporation Ltd v Amplight Ltd" (ChD Abs58921) concerning a refusal of consent should equally be applied to conditions imposed upon the giving of consent. The landlord's insistence upon a guarantor was not justified.
590			_aABS
650			_aSURETIES
650			_aGUARANTORS
650			_aMOUNT EDEN LAND LTD V TOWERSTONE LTD
650			_aLONDON AND ARGYLL DEVELOPMENTS LTD V MOUNT COOK LAND LTD
650			_aLICENCES TO ASSIGN
650			_aFOOTWEAR CORPORATION LTD V AMPLIGHT PROPERTIES LTD
690			_aLANDLORD AND TENANT-LEASES-CASE LAW
942			_n0
999			_c72143 _d72143