header-logo header-logo

26 April 2013 / Nicholas Asprey
Issue: 7557 / Categories: Features , Property
printer mail-detail

Read the small print

istock_000005657917large1

A covenant to keep a property in good & substantial repair & condition can hold hidden pitfalls, as Nicholas Asprey reports

Leases sometimes contain a covenant to keep the property “in good and substantial repair and condition”. In effect, this is two covenants; namely, a covenant to keep the property in good and substantial repair and a covenant to keep the property in good and substantial condition. This article examines how the covenant to keep in good condition has potential to go beyond the liability to keep in good repair. This is not a new topic but there are unresolved issues and the potential for the second covenant to go beyond repair is not always understood.

It must be emphasised that each case turns on the particular covenant construed in its own context and surrounding circumstances, as was emphasised by Robert Walker LJ in Welsh v Greenwich LBC [2000] 3 EGLR 41. The factors to be taken into account were described by Nicholls LJ in Holding & Management Ltd v Property Holding & Investment

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll