WebDec 2, 2011 · Iqbal v Thakrar [2004] EWCA Civ 952 Re 11 and 27 Parklands View (Forfeiture) [2011] EWLVT MAN/LV/ FFT/00CF/0002; [2011] EWLVT MAN/LV/ FFT/00CF/0003 Tod-Heatley v Benham [1888] 40 ChD 80 Previous Discrimination Law: Claims by equity partners Next Musings From Manchester: New Year’s regulations WebIqbal v Thakrar It is reasonable for a landlord to refuse consent based on concerns about the potential consequences the alterations will have to the structure of the building. Jervis …

BAILII - England and Wales Cases page 134

WebConsents. Unreasonable refusal to consent Iqbal v Thakrar [2004] EWCA Civ 592 Facts Lease of ground floor premises for a term of 999 years, which contained a covenant not … WebThe appellants, the defendants, Mr Rishi Thakrar and his sister Ms Rupa Thakrar, appeal with the permission of this court (Clarke LJ) from the order made by Mrs Recorder … dateline anchors

BAILII - All Cases page 312

WebThis Practice Note sets out the various forms of covenants against alterations, the modification of covenants under LTA 1927, the requirement for landlords to act reasonably, applications for consent to alter, reasonable grounds for withholding consent, reasonable conditions subject to which consent may be granted and inadvertently giving consent. Mohammed Iqbal v Rupa Thakrar (2004) Summary. The defendant landlord had not unreasonably withheld consent to the proposed alterations to be carried out by the claimant tenant since the landlord had had insufficient material to ascertain whether the proposed works would have affected the structure of the building as a whole. Facts. WebTherefore whilst a tenant can apply to the court a declaration that consent is being unreasonably withheld, it cannot claim damages. Should the landlord decide to withhold consent, then the principles laid out in the case of Iqbal v Thakrar [3] can be used to determine whether that refusal was reasonable. dateline anchor woman