Messenex Property Investments Limited v Lanark Square Limited

Messenex Property Investments Limited v Lanark Square Limited

The landlord acted reasonably in withholding consent to the proposed works because the tenant failed to provide preliminary structural engineer's drawings for the Rooftop Works, which was a legitimate property-related concern. This reason alone was sufficient to justify withholding consent, regardless of other reasons advanced. The landlord was not unreasonable in requiring an unconditional undertaking for costs. Other reasons, such as trespass on retained land and lack of clarity, were not reasonable bases at the time proceedings were issued, but the decision to withhold consent remained reasonable overall.

Parties
Claimant: Messenex Property Investments Limited; Defendant: Lanark Square Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil (property/lease) / Judgment After Trial (part 8 Claim)
Outcome
Claim dismissed; declarations refused.
Legal Topics
Alterations Under Lease, Landlord's Consent, Reasonableness of Withholding Consent, Section 19(2) Landlord and Tenant Act 1927, Structural Alterations, Trespass on Retained Land, Undertakings for Costs
Landlord and Tenant Law Property Law Alterations Under Lease Landlord's Consent Reasonableness of Withholding Consent Section 19(2) Landlord and Tenant Act 1927 Structural Alterations Trespass on Retained Land +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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Messenex Property Investments Limited

Claimant

Lanark Square Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (property/lease) / Judgment After Trial (part 8 Claim)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the landlord unreasonably withheld consent to tenant's proposed alterations under the lease and section 19(2) Landlord and Tenant Act 1927
  2. 2 Whether the landlord's reasons for withholding consent were reasonable
  3. 3 Whether the tenant's applications for consent were sufficiently clear and complete

Ratio Decidendi

The landlord acted reasonably in withholding consent to the proposed works because the tenant failed to provide preliminary structural engineer's drawings for the Rooftop Works, which was a legitimate property-related concern. This reason alone was sufficient to justify withholding consent, regardless of other reasons advanced. The landlord was not unreasonable in requiring an unconditional undertaking for costs. Other reasons, such as trespass on retained land and lack of clarity, were not reasonable bases at the time proceedings were issued, but the decision to withhold consent remained reasonable overall.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed; declarations refused.