10. alienation Flashcards
why are property lawyers required if company is doing badly?
Company will want to dispose of its obligations (e.g. rent, esp. if RR coming up)
Break clause?
Assignment?
Underlet?
what does ‘ALIENATION’ mean?
A method for T disposing of the whole or part of their interest in leasehold property
OR
granting a further interest out of that leasehold interest to a 3P
TYPES of alienation
Assignment or Underlet (our focus)
- Surrender
- Charge/Mortgage
- Sharing
- Subletting
- License to occupy (not exclusive possession) – i.e. parting with possession
privity of contract
exists between original parties to the contract
privity of estate
exists between parties who share immediate interest in the same land
e.g. L+T
BUT NOT L + UT
privity of contract + privity of estate upon assignment
Privity of estate
- LL + T = no more
- LL + A = yes
privity of contract
- LL + T = yes
= BUT NB. new leases = no (LT(C)A 1995)
OLD VS NEW LEASE (relevant date)
old: granted before 1 Jan 1996 (or pursuant to agreement before date)
new: granted on or after 1 Jan 1996 (and not pursuant to agreement before that date)
old leases - details
ONE - governed by PRIVITY OF CONTRACT (LL + T always liable to each other - regardless of assignment)
- So, important to obtain A/UT’s direct covenant with LL to comply with T’s covenants
- gives LL direction action in contract
- LL more relaxed about assignment to someone with weaker covenant strength (LL can pursue original T)
TWO - PRE-CONDITIONS to be satisfied before assignment
- valid if genuine (and not attempt to state what would be reasonable refusal of consent and ousting court jurisdiction) - Homebase v Allied Dunbar
new lease - details
ONE - LCTA 1995 ABOLISHED PRIVITY OF CONTRACT once T lawfully ASSIGNS new lease (T no longer liable as original T) - s.17
- T automatically released from all covenants
- new A auto bound (s.5)
- must be lawful assignment (i.e. conditions lawfully imposed by LL are complied with)
- LL can no longer rely on covenant strength of original T (original T no longer liable throughout remainder of term)
OPTION: USE AGA (not as good but alternative)
TWO - pre-conditions for ASSIGNMENT replaced with S.19(1)A AGREEMENTS
- allows lease to specify circumstances and conditions where auto reasonable for LL to withhold consent
LLLL exam structure
LEASE - what type of covenant
LAW - s.19(1)a, s.19(1A), s.1 LTA 1927, s.144 LPA 1925
L TITLE - RCs preventing alienation? lender’s consent required?
Local auth - PP issues? e.g. if change of use
s.19(1)a LTA 1927
ALL types of leases
ANY Alienation
QUALIFIED COVENANTS
QC into FQC
Can recover reasonable sum for legal/other expenses (usual for LL to request undertaking from T to do this at outset)
Moss Bros Group v CSC Prop
s.19(1)a LTA
REASONABLENESS
if L has T mix policy and A’s occupation breaches it, refusal = reasonable
S.144 LPA 1925
FOR ALIENATION of any lease
- cannot charge fine or premium as a condition unless lease allows L to do so (which T wouldn’t usually approve)
s.19(1A) LTA 1927
- new commercial leases
- assignments only
effect:
- L&T can list circumstances and conditions which will not be subject to reasonableness test (auto reasonable) - s.19(1A)b
s.19(1C)
if circumstances/conditions determined by ref to LL
LL must act reasonably OR T might have a right to refer to independent 3P
- e.g. circumstance for refusal is “in the [reasonable] opinion of LL, the assignee is of adequate financial standing”
- must say “to be determined by LL”
- if clause is vague and doesn’t say who determiner of whether breach or not, need more info, e.g. suggest T hire surveyor)
s.1 LTA 1988
any types of lease
any alienation
fully qualified covenants (INCL. those upgraded by s.19(1)a LTA)
effect:
- burden on LL to show refusal is reasonable
- LL must provide written reason
- if consent, must give written consent within reasonable time if T applies for consent
what is ‘reasonable time’ in s.1 LTA 1988
WILL NOT generally expire before LL given sufficient info (but LL must ask for info if it requires it - otherwise there is delay)
depends on FACTS but usually measured in days/weeks rather than months
failure to comply with s.1 LTA 1988
LL breaches statutory duty - LL may be liable for tortious damages
T could recover losses for fees incurred (e.g. agent/lawyer fees)
T could get exemplary damages against LL if LL particularly unreasonable
Dong Bang v Davina
s.1 LTA 1988
reasonable time = 28 days from receipt of application if LL given Heads of Terms (this is usually sufficient info)
THIS IS NOT IN STATUTE/HARD AND FAST RULE - what is reasonable depends on circumstances
reasonable time usually starts from receipt of appropriate references and application for consent
Mount Edna v Folia
LL under obligation to reply to application within reasonable time even if pre-conditions or s.19(1A) conditions are not met
LL’s title - freehold issues?
RC preventing alienation?
Lender’s consent required?
Consent of LL’s mortagee
- T may need to ensure this is obtained if:
1. specifically required to do this in lease), or
- assignment triggers the need to register a previously unregistered lease (reg cannot be affected until lender’s consent obtained due to RESTRICTION in Proprietorship Register in LL’s title)
- if LL’s title is unregistered, because lender has to be approached as it has custody of title docs needed for first reg
form of LL’s consent for alienation
should do it in a legal document so:
- it can outline conditions
- (IF OLD LEASE) to obtain A/UT’s direct covenant with LL that it will comply with T’s covenants in the lease to be assigned/granted to it (gives LL direct action in contract if covenant ever breached, otherwise no privity of contract) - this is auto in s.3 LCTA for new leases
Aubergine Enterprises Ltd v Lakewood International Ltd
LL’s solicitors wrote to T’s solicitors that LL had agreed to the disposal ‘in principle’ subject to license
- this was construed as LL’s full written consent even before formal license was granted
- so NOT SAFE to give consent ‘in principle’