Kumar v Dunning & Anor [1987] EWCA Civ 1 (15 April 1987)

A covenant by a surety guaranteeing performance of a tenant's covenants, which themselves touch and concern the land, also touches and concerns the land and is enforceable by an assignee of the reversion. The benefit of such a surety covenant passes with the reversion to the assignee, even in the absence of express assignment.

Citation: [1987] EWCA Civ 1
Parties: Appellant: Kumar; Respondent: Kevin Edward Dunning; Respondent: Pauline Marian Powell (executor of Mr Powell)
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 15 April 1987
Procedural Posture: Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome: Appeal allowed
Legal Topics: Assignment of Lease, Surety Covenants, Privity of Contract, Privity of Estate, Covenants Running With the Land

Property Law Landlord and Tenant Law Assignment of Lease Surety Covenants Privity of Contract Privity of Estate Covenants Running With the Land

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 24 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

Kumar

Appellant

Kevin Edward Dunning

Respondent

Pauline Marian Powell (executor of Mr Powell)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

1 Whether an assignee of the reversion on a lease can enforce the payment of rent by sureties who guaranteed the tenant's obligations under the lease
2 Whether the benefit of a surety covenant passes to an assignee of the reversion without express assignment

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

Judgment entered for the appellant in the sum of £23,401.96 plus interest to be agreed
Leave to appeal to the House of Lords granted with stay pending appeal on usual terms