header-logo header-logo

No guarantees for landlords

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

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

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
back-to-top-scroll