Assignment and underletting

Restrictions on alienation

Forms of alienation covenant

In the absence of any provision in the lease to the contrary, a tenant has the right to assign its interest in the lease and to create subleases. It is, however, a rare lease which does not restrict the tenant's freedom in this respect. Restrictions on alienation generally take the form of covenants on the part of the tenant prohibiting certain types of dealing. Such prohibitions may be 'absolute', 'qualified' or 'fully qualified' in form.

An absolute covenant (one that prohibits an action without allowing for landlord’s consent) is a complete bar if it covers the proposed transaction.

A qualified covenant prohibits a transaction without the landlord’s consent (but without requiring that the consent should not be unreasonably withheld). However, section 19(1)(a) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1927 imports that requirement into any covenant that requires landlord’s consent for assigning, underletting, charging or parting with possession and applies ‘notwithstanding any express provision to the contrary’. Such covenants are therefore ‘fully qualified’.

In addition, qualified covenants in certain building leases are of no effect and the tenant may assign,

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

TAKE A FREE TRIAL

Latest Property Disputes News

Property Disputes weekly highlights—20 March 2025

This week's edition of Property Disputes weekly highlights includes: the grant of permission to apply for judicial review in relation to the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024, an appeal concerning the validity of the service of a claim form served in reliance on section 48 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 after the end of the tenancy, a High Court appeal decision that failed window seals and glazing units do constitute disrepair under student accommodation leases, and an Insolvency and Companies Court appeal decision that interests in co-owned freehold property vested in the trustee of the bankrupts’ estate. It also includes various updates from the HM Courts and Tribunals Service—including updated guidance relating to the Damages Claims Portal for claims proceeding under CPR PD 51ZB, new precedent costs budget forms and publication of its contact details for using the online claims services, as well as details of the commencement of the Court and Tribunal Fees (Miscellaneous Amendments) Order 2025.

Minutes of the CPR Committee meeting—7 February 2025

Dispute Resolution analysis: The minutes of the CPR Committee (CPRC) meeting of 7 February 2025 (conducted in a hybrid format at The Rolls Building (Royal Courts of Justice) and via video conference) cover a number of issues including Extended Fixed Recoverable Costs, Fixed Costs Medical Reports, amendments to CPR PD 52D, and to CPR 8.5, the Lacuna Sub-Committee, Costs Budgeting Lite (Civil Justice Council Costs Report) and the Litigant in Person hourly rate.

Partial success in seeking ‘newcomer’ relief against protesters (MBR Acres v Curtin)

Dispute Resolution analysis: This is a lengthy and detailed judgment by a judge with significant experience of injunctions against named protesters, persons unknown, and (more recently) ‘newcomers’. The judgment is notable as being a careful application of the newly re-stated jurisdiction to make injunctions against newcomers, with Mr Justice Nicklin expressing particular concern about the proper remit of this lately-unveiled tool. The judge was particularly concerned about the propriety of making contra mundum injunctions which seek to restrict protesters in expressing their views. Nicklin J was clear that the court should exercise proper scrutiny in respect of applications for such relief to ensure that the relief was justified, proportionate and in all the circumstances appropriate–bearing in mind the lesser safeguards applicable to contempt as compared to ordinary criminal proceedings. Written by Matthew McGhee, barrister at Twenty Essex.

Property Disputes weekly highlights—13 March 2025

This week's edition of Property Disputes weekly highlights includes: a Court of Appeal decision that trespass is concerned with interference with possession of land, not ownership, High Court decisions concerning a landlord’s opposition on ground (g) of section 30(1) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, an unsuccessful claim for a share of proceeds of sale of property, and a sale agreement breached due to sale of houses, and a Technology and Construction Court decision to impose a Building Liability Order on an associated company for fire safety and structural defects in a building. It also includes the Civil Procedure Rule Committee’s announcement that its annual open meeting will be held virtually, HM Courts & Tribunals Service’s guidance on issuing and managing online money claims using MyHMCTS, the Welsh Government’s written statement on the phased implementation of the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024, and a Scottish court’s imposition of an antisocial behaviour order against a tenant.

View Property Disputes by content type :

News