Feast or famine: Another Good Harvest? Siobhan Jones reports
Nine months have passed since the decision in Good Harvest Partnership LLP v Centaur Services Ltd [2010] All ER (D) 238 (Mar). K/S Victoria Street v House of Fraser (Stores Management) Ltd and Others [2010] EWHC 3006 (Ch) is the first case in which the court has been asked to revisit some of the issues raised in Good Harvest.
Before looking in more detail at the summary judgment decision in House of Fraser, it is helpful to set the scene by way of a brief review of the anti-avoidance provisions themselves and how these were applied in Good Harvest.
The 1995 Act – anti-avoidance
Section 25 of the 1995 Act is a comprehensive anti-avoidance provision which operates to prevent parties to a lease from wriggling out of the central purpose of the 1995 Act. Section 25(1) provides that:
Any agreement relating to a tenancy is void to the extent that:
(a) it would apart from this section have effect to exclude, modify or otherwise frustrate the
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=77dbbdb7_1)
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=b3bea7f_1)
