A landlord’s promise, a tenant’s power
When it comes to leases, most people believe that landlords hold most of the power. However, in relation to long residential leases, the tables may well have recently turned in one respect at least following a recent Supreme Court decision.
Generally speaking, when it comes to leases, most people believe that landlords hold most of the power. However, in relation to long residential leases, the tables may well have recently turned in one respect at least following a recent Supreme Court decision. Simply put, a landlord is not now free to license works in breach of an absolute prohibition in a lease against carrying out alterations without the agreement of all the other flat tenants in a block where a landlord has covenanted to enforce similar obligations against all the tenants in the block (known as a mutual enforcement covenant).
As a result, it now appears that a tenant has increased control over its landlord’s decisions. A landlord is no longer freely able to agree works (that may be perfectly reasonable and well intentioned) falling within an absolute prohibition without first obtaining the agreement of all the tenants who benefit from a mutual enforcement covenant. In other words, tenants in a block may now have the power to control certain alterations a landlord may consent to. At the most extreme limits of such power, tenants could potentially prevent alterations occurring altogether since, in a block with a substantial number of flats, it is highly likely that at least one tenant will object to works being carried out.
This case demonstrates just how careful residential landlords in a block are going to have to be when receiving requests to license something which is otherwise absolutely prohibited under a lease. This applies not just in relation to alterations, but potentially extends to any absolute prohibitions under a lease (e.g. those relating to use). Mutual enforcement covenants are not a requirement under the current edition of the Council of Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook, so a landlord may wish to consider whether it enters into mutual enforcement covenants in the future, especially given how easy it could prove to breach those covenants.
+44 (0)330 045 2145
You may be interested in...
Subsidy control lessons to be learnt from Bulb
Vicarious liability – don’t overlook the importance of close connection
Practical points from High Court ruling that Tesco has infringed Lidl’s IP rights in its famous yellow circle logo
Mediation – remote or in person?
Terminating student lettings: a quick guide for landlords
Confirmation of ACAS early conciliation in the context of multiple claim forms
ClientEarth claim may expand scope of directors' duties
The Solicitors Regulation Authority has approval to take over from the Solicitors Indemnity Fund
Embargoed Judgments: A Professional Word of Caution
Register your interest to join our next Home Delivery Academy
Browne Jacobson’s intellectual property lawyers ranked experts in World Trademark Review guide 2023
Term-time school worker entitled to national minimum wage for unworked basic hours
Legal Update - Public matters newsletter
Public matters - January 2023
Litigation in 2023 – Reforms on the horizon
Settlement agreements – what are the limitations?
Settlement agreements are commonplace in an employment context and are ordinarily used to provide the parties to the agreement with certainty following the conclusion of an employment relationship.
Five “takeaways” in claims against mortgage brokers following Taylor v Legal & General Partnership Services Ltd  EWHC 2475 (Ch)
Claims arising from interest-only mortgages have been farmed in volume. Many such claims to date have sought to drive a narrative that interest-only mortgages are an inherently toxic product and brokers were negligent simply for suggesting them. Taylor is a helpful recalibration, focussing instead on what the monies raised by the mortgage product were being used for and whether the client understood the inherent risks.
The Future of Mediation
Trigger happy when directors’ duties are the target?
In a judgment handed down yesterday the Supreme Court has affirmed that a so called “creditor duty” exists for directors such that in some circumstances company directors are required to act in accordance with, or to consider the interests of creditors. Those circumstances potentially arise when a company is insolvent or where there is a “probability” of an insolvency. We explore below the “trigger” for such a test to apply and its implications.
The Retained EU Law
Created at the end of the Brexit transition period, Retained EU Law is a category of domestic law that consists of EU-derived legislation retained in our domestic legal framework by the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018. This was never intended to be a permanent arrangement as parliament promised to deal with retained EU law through the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill (the “Bill”).
Failure to comply with PD57AC — it can be costly!
Practice Direction 57AC (“PD57AC”) relates to witness evidence in trials and explicitly applies only to the Business and Property Courts. It applies to existing proceedings in which the witness statements for trial are signed on or after 6 April 2021.
Sequana: Supreme clarification on the duty owed to creditors
The Supreme Court has unanimously dismissed the BTI v Sequana appeal and reviewed the existence, content and engagement of the so-called ‘creditor duty’; being the point at which the interest of creditors is said to intrude upon the decision-making of directors of companies in financial distress.
Common AI related technology project disputes and how to prevent them
The increased use of artificial intelligence (AI) is revolutionising the way businesses operate and is having a disruptive impact in sectors that have traditionally been slow to modernise.
The Civil Justice Council’s (CJC) proposed reforms to the Pre-Action Protocols (PAPs) and the possible mandatory ADR gateway. What could this mean for your case?
In November 2021, The Civil Justice Council’s published its interim report on proposed changes to the current Pre-Action Protocols, which included a mandatory Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) gateway. In this article, we look at proposed reforms and consider what this could mean for your case.
Job applicant receives settlement due to unlawful age discrimination at interview
Janice Walsh applied for a job with Domino’s Pizza, hoping to secure a role as a Delivery Driver. However things quickly took a turn for the worse during her initial interview, with the very first question that she was asked relating to her age. Ms Walsh was ultimately informed that she had not been successful in her application.
Covid Rent Arrears: Cinema operators’ appeals dismissed
The Court of Appeal has dismissed two cases regarding rent arrears accrued during the Covid lockdowns. The cases are London Trocadero (2015) LLP v Picturehouse Cinemas Ltd and Bank of New York Mellon (International) Ltd v Cine-UK Ltd.
Proceed with caution – covenants in franchise agreements
In the recent case of Dwyer (UK Franchising) Limited v Fredbar Limited and ano’r  EWCA Civ 889, the Court of Appeal considered the reasonableness of restrictive covenants in a franchise agreement.
The Damages Claims Portal - A brief introduction for clients
Update: building safety repairs pledge signed by over 35 major housing developers
On 14 February 2022, Secretary of State of the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, Michael Gove, announced proposals designed to pressure building developers and materials manufacturers to fund the remediation of unsafe properties.
Wide interpretation of “detriment” caused victimisation claim to succeed
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) decision in the case of Warburton v The Chief Constable.
Restrictive Covenants – are changes coming?
Restrictive covenants are widely recognised as a complex area of employment law that is of key importance to many organisations. However more recently, they have become a hot topic with the Government launching their consultation.
Are whistleblowers entitled to keep their employer’s confidential documents?
In Nissan v Passi, the High Court recently considered the issue of an employee retaining confidential documents belonging to his former employer in the context of the employer’s application for an injunction seeking the return of such documents from the employee.
Four top tips to avoid disputes when entering into service level agreements with suppliers
We regularly encounter disputes relating to Service Level Agreement provisions - here we provide four top tips that you can use to minimise disputes.
Revisions to the Highway Code and potential impact on civil liability
The Highway Code has had its first major revision since 2007. Amongst several changes, a new hierarchy has been created, with road users who are most likely to cause harm having the greatest responsibility to reduce the threat they may pose to other road users (rule 204 of the Code).
Legal Update - Shared Insights
Shared Insights: Preparing for 2022 – the big issues for legal teams across health and social care
We were delighted to be joined by Dr Nigel Sturrock, Regional Medical Director for the Midlands at NHS England and NHS Improvement. He gave an overview of the pressures placed on the NHS by the pandemic, including the impact on urgent and emergency care, elective procedures and staffing.
Real estate quarterly update - October to December 2021
Read more about our latest real estate update aimed at in-house lawyers practising in the property and real estate sector.
Commentary: Manchester Building Society v Grant Thornton LLP
Recovering School Fees? Don’t forget about the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims
Schools will need to comply with the requirements of the PAPDC or potentially face financial consequences. This article provides an overview of the PAPDC and explains how it applies to schools.
Dealing with Covid Rent Arrears – an overview but no specifics
Following on from our recent article on the release of the updated Code of Practice for dealing with commercial rent arrears that have accrued throughout the pandemic, we continue to highlight what the overall principles seek to ensure - fairness and proportionality for both landlords and tenants across each step of the arbitration process.
Reaction: Supreme Court rules in favour of Google
The Supreme Court has unanimously overturned the Court of Appeal’s 2019 decision in the case Lloyd (Respondent) v Google LLC (Appellant) which allowed the claimant, Mr Lloyd, to serve a representative action on Google on behalf of over four million iPhone users who were seeking damages for ‘loss of control’ of personal data.
Local authorities: recoveries from abusers for the benefit of the public purse
It is an unfortunate reality that many local authorities face historical abuse claims, and often held vicariously liable for abuse by their former employees. We set out an overview of recoveries law and insight into successes we have had in recouping money for local authorities.