header-logo header-logo

03 August 2011
Issue: 7477 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

No guarantees for landlords

Lease guarantees left worthless by K/S Victoria Street case ruling

Commercial property landlords have been left high and dry after a significant Court of Appeal judgment on lease guarantees.

In K/S Victoria Street v House of Fraser [2011] EWCA Civ 904, the court held that many guarantees are worthless, falling foul of the Landlord and Tenant (Covenants) Act 1995, s 25.

LexisPSL property solicitor Malcolm Dowden said: “There will be a lot of firms redrafting their precedent leases, and a lot of landlords looking with concern at guarantees that are now confirmed to be void. Lawyers who have given a clean bill of financial health to an investment purchase assuming the validity of guarantees may now have to reconsider that advice.”

According to Dowden, the ruling means that “even if freely given and fully intended to be legally binding, a guarantee given by the outgoing tenant’s guarantor in respect of the immediate assignee is void”.

He explained that the 1995 Act was “a hasty response to the perceived injustice of tenants remaining liable for premises long after they had parted with them. Parliament’s answer was to provide an automatic release from liability when the tenant of a lease granted on or after
1 January 1996 assigns it to a new tenant”.

Landlords argued that investment values would be slashed as a result, and their lobbying led to the creation of “authorised guarantee agreements” (AGAs). As a condition of giving its consent to an assignment, a landlord may require the outgoing tenant to guarantee performance by its assignee.

Dowden says: “Since 1996 landlords’ solicitors have tried a range of drafting approaches to work around the limitations of the 1995 Act.

“Only one of those approaches—requiring the guarantor to join in or to stand behind the tenant’s obligations in the AGA—survives the Court of Appeal ruling. Other perfectly rational approaches have been struck down—including the approach initially devised by Clifford Chance under which the outgoing tenant was required to assign first to its guarantor. The guarantor would become ‘tenant’ for a moment before passing the lease on to the actual assignee. Having been tenant for a moment, the guarantor could give an AGA.”

He said landlords may now be deterred from consenting to lease assignments where the covenant strength of the assignee is unproven, “increasing the risk of high street shop units and other commercial properties remaining empty and unused”.

Issue: 7477 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

HFW—Simon Petch

HFW—Simon Petch

Global shipping practice expands with experienced ship finance partner hire

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Infrastructure specialist joins as partner in Glasgow office

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll