header-logo header-logo

Compare & contrast: three lessons from the courts on covenants

18 June 2020 / Andrew Francis
Issue: 7891 / Categories: Features , Property
printer mail-detail
22939
Why is the ability of a tenant to modify certain restrictive covenants in leases under s 84(1) of the Law of Property Act 1925 not better known, asks Andrew Francis
  • The decision in Edgware Road.
  • Comparisons withShaviram and Berkeley Square.
  • Practical suggestions.

At first sight there is not much in common between a vacant 1980s office building near Basingstoke Railway Station, a mid-eighteenth century Grade I townhouse and a Grade II mews house of the same period, on the west side of Berkeley Square in Mayfair and finally, part of a 1960s development (formerly used as offices) on the west side of the Edgware Road, less than half a mile north of Marble Arch. The tenant of each property wanted to modify the user covenant in its lease. While the locations and properties were different, the commercial and economic interests of the applicant tenants were aligned, as were the interests of the respondent landlords. In each application

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll