Significant
s.23(1)
Flairline Properties Ltd v Hassan
[1999] 1 EGLR 138 · High Court · 1998
The question
Does a lengthy closure for reinstatement after a fire break business occupation?
What was held
No, where the tenant retains the intention to return and the thread of continuity is unbroken; physical absence alone is not decisive.
For a landlord
A closed unit is not automatically an unprotected one. Test intention to resume, not just the shutters.
For a tenant
Paper the intention to return: insurance claims, contractor appointments, licensing, correspondence with the landlord.
The provisions this turns on
Read alongside this
- Sainsbury's Supermarkets Ltd v Medley Assets LtdUnreported, County Court at Central London, 21 March 2024 (H00MK414)
- Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea v Mellcraft Ltd[2024] EWHC 539 (Ch)
- Barclays Wealth Trustees (Jersey) Ltd v Erimus Housing Ltd[2014] EWCA Civ 303
- Lee-Verhulst (Investments) Ltd v Harwood Trust[1973] QB 204
Sponsored by McGarrigle & Co
Need professional assistance with your lease?
Case summary for general guidance only, not legal advice. Judgments turn on their own facts and later decisions may qualify them — check the primary transcript before relying on any point in correspondence or proceedings.