header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
31 July 2009 / Malcolm Dowden
Issue: 7380 / Categories: Features , Landlord&tenant , Property
printer mail-detail

Please re-lease me

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Malcolm Dowden on disputes of disclaimed leases & subtenants of part

A liquidator’s disclaimer of a lease ends the rights, interests and liabilities of the insolvent tenant in respect of the property, but statute preserves the rights and liabilities of other parties, including mortgagees and subtenants.

However, where subtenants remain in occupation, and particularly where they occupy only part of the premises covered by the disclaimed lease, the extent of their liabilities and obligations to the landlord is unclear.

The “phantom” lease

Insolvency Act 1986 s 178(4) provides that disclaimer: (i) determines, as from the date of disclaimer, the rights, interests and liabilities of the company in or in respect of the property disclaimed, but (ii)does not, except so far as is necessary for the purpose of releasing the company from any liability, affect the rights or liabilities of any other person.

Hindcastle v Barbara Attenborough ([1997] AC 70, [1996] 1 All ER 737) confirmed that under this deeming provision the rights and liabilities of guarantors, mortgagees and subtenants remain as though the

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll