Cases - Ropemaker Properties Ltd v Noonhaven

Record details

Name

Ropemaker Properties Ltd v Noonhaven

Date

[1991]

Citation

9 EG 125

Keywords

This case concerned a nightclub that had been used for purposes of prostitution which was in breach of covenant.

Summary

The lease was held to be forfeit but the tenant was able to obtain relief. Relief from forfeiture had been granted on terms that the tenant (who had denied knowledge of the fact) entered into a variation of the user covenant in order to exclude hostesses from the premises.

There was no stigma in this case: they were good tenants, and it would be a heavy loss if they lost the lease. Just because the breach was immoral does not mean the tenant could not get relief. Flagrant breaches are no bar to relief.

The court held that the wording would result in a breach if hostesses were, to the tenant’s knowledge, providing their services, however innocently, for reward. The lease provided that the premises should not be used or permitted to be used for any illegal or immoral purposes.

In due course the landlord sought to forfeit the lease on the grounds that the premises were used for prostitution. The judge found this to be the case, but granted relief from forfeiture on terms, among other things, that the tenant (who had denied knowledge of the fact) should enter into a deed of variation of the user clause, so as to exclude hostesses from the premises.

Held

The variation should be worded in such a way that the only knowledge on the tenant's part which the landlord would have to prove in order for a breach to arise would be knowledge that girls were acting as hostesses; that is to say, providing their services, however innocently, for reward.