Landlord's consent to alter
Luke Weldon LLM
Commercial and property dispute resolution | Focused on early resolution and positive outcomes | Partner at Carbon Law Partners | Lecturer for CILEX students
In the case of Jacobs v Chalcot Crescent (Management Company) Limited, the High Court considered an appeal by a residential long leaseholder regarding his landlord's refusal to grant consent for alterations.
The tenant initially sought consent, leading to a 6-month exchange of correspondence between the parties' surveyors without resolution. Subsequently, frustrated by the delays, the tenant proceeded with the alterations.
Eleven months post-initial request, the landlord formally denied consent, citing fire safety concerns. Surprisingly, during legal proceedings initiated by the tenant for a declaration that consent had been unreasonably withheld, the landlord shifted their argument to focus on potential risks to structural integrity.
The High Court ruled in favour of the tenant's appeal due to inadequacies in the landlord's argument. ?They can’t come to trial and argue a risk to structural integrity but not include that submission in their defence.?
If the landlord had presented their case more effectively, the court stated:
1. They could have demonstrated that the delay in decision-making was not fatal to their cause, as they had engaged with the tenant in good faith throughout the process.
领英推荐
2. However, withholding consent based on concerns about structural integrity required supporting evidence from experts of which they had none.
3. Additionally, it would have been more reasonable for the landlord to propose alternative solutions that did not jeopardise the building's structural integrity.
The court appears to afford a significant degree of flexibility concerning timeframes compared to, say, a request for consent to assign.? That is, provided the facts warrant such extended deliberation.
Landlords are advised to refrain from introducing entirely new grounds for refusal without prior consideration and secure evidence from somebody with the necessary expertise if they are basing their decision on something outside their skill set. ?
Moreover, courts favour conditional refusals that prioritise protecting genuine interests over outright rejection. ?Opting for a compromise plan can often yield mutually agreeable outcomes and the court will expect to see parties working together to that aim.
If you have any legal inquiries or discussions on similar matters, feel free to reach out to me at [email protected] or 07816 755 372.