Andrew Chesser explores the thorny issue of obtaining landlord’s consent
Landlords and tenants often have equally valid, but conflicting, priorities when seeking consent to assign, sub-let or carry out alterations. For landlords, these can include estate management issues, strength of tenant covenant and their own business interests; for tenants, disposal, retention and expansion of their business premises (often one of the largest overheads for a business).
Frustration
Seeking and giving consent can produce frustrations for both sides, with issues of timing and the provision of sufficient information being common problems. The form of consent can also be an issue as seen in British Telecommunications Limited v Rail Safety and Standard Boards Limited [2011] All ER (D) 290 (Jul). Here, the parties accepted the agreement could be determined if “superior landlord’s consent” had not been obtained by a given date. One party purported to determine the agreement by notice, arguing that superior landlord’s consent had not been obtained as relevant licences had not been entered into by the prescribed date. The other party argued that consent in principle was sufficient.
Consent in principle
By
