No.1 West India Quay (Residential) Ltd v East Tower Apartments Ltd [2016] EWHC 2438 (Ch) (06 October 2016)

No.1 West India Quay (Residential) Ltd v East Tower Apartments Ltd [2016] EWHC 2438 (Ch) (06 October 2016)

It was reasonable for the landlord to require a bank reference and a surveyor's inspection (with reasonable fee) as conditions for consent to assign, but unreasonable to require legal fees of £1,250 plus VAT. However, because the landlord insisted on the unreasonable fee as a precondition, the refusal of consent was unreasonable overall. Notice for apartment 28.08 was not validly served until delivered to the registered office, so consent was not unreasonably delayed. Costs orders were upheld as within the judge's discretion.

Citation
[2016] EWHC 2438 (Ch)
Parties
Appellant/cross Respondent: No.1 West India Quay (Residential) Ltd; Respondent/cross Appellant: East Tower Apartments Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 October 2016
Procedural Posture
Appeal (from County Court to High Court, Chancery Division) / Judgment on Appeal and Cross Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; cross-appeal dismissed; costs orders upheld.
Legal Topics
Assignment of Lease, Reasonableness of Withholding Consent, Landlord and Tenant Act 1988, Service of Notices, Administration Charges, Costs Orders
Landlord and Tenant Property Law Contract Law Assignment of Lease Reasonableness of Withholding Consent Landlord and Tenant Act 1988 Service of Notices Administration Charges +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

No.1 West India Quay (Residential) Ltd

Appellant/cross Respondent

East Tower Apartments Ltd

Respondent/cross Appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal (from County Court to High Court, Chancery Division) / Judgment on Appeal and Cross Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether landlord's refusal of consent to assignment was unreasonable under s.1 Landlord and Tenant Act 1988
  2. 2 Whether requirement for bank reference, inspection, and legal fees were reasonable conditions for consent
  3. 3 Whether consent to assign was unreasonably delayed for apartment 28.08

Ratio Decidendi

It was reasonable for the landlord to require a bank reference and a surveyor's inspection (with reasonable fee) as conditions for consent to assign, but unreasonable to require legal fees of £1,250 plus VAT. However, because the landlord insisted on the unreasonable fee as a precondition, the refusal of consent was unreasonable overall. Notice for apartment 28.08 was not validly served until delivered to the registered office, so consent was not unreasonably delayed. Costs orders were upheld as within the judge's discretion.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; cross-appeal dismissed; costs orders upheld.

Orders

  • Declarations in sub-paragraphs 1(2), (3), (4) of the County Court order set aside; declarations in paragraphs 1(1) and 2 upheld.
  • Costs orders made by the County Court judge upheld.