The Law Quarterly Review Volume 26-30 (Paperback)

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1914 edition. Excerpt: ... has a right to sell and convey it, unless he be controlled by the terms of his grant.' It is now held that if a tenant for years be restrained from assigning or underletting without the consent of his landlord, which is not to be unreasonably withheld in the case of a respectable and responsible person, he may, having submitted the name of a respectable and responsible person, assume after the lapse of areasonable time that the lessor has no substantial objection to the proposed assignee or undertenant, and assign or nnderlet without a formal demand of consent: Lewis and Allenhy (1909), Lim. v. Pegge 1914 I Ch. 782, 83 L. J. Ch. 387. Common sense will agree with equity in this case in regarding that as done which ought to be done. In so far as Green 8' Sana (Nort/rampton) Lim. v. Morris 1914 I Ch. 562, 83 L.J. Ch. 559, proceeds upon the ground that an assignment for the benefit of creditors stands upon the same footing as an involuntary assignment resulting from bankruptcy, it may be doubted whether the case is consistent with Doe d. Ilfitc/lineon v. Carter (1798) 8 T. R. 57, 300, 4 R. R. 586. The principal case is distinguishable from Trego v. Hunt 1896 A. C. 7, 65 L. J. Ch. 1, in that there was no sale for value, 'and the actual decision seems to rest upon a secure foundation. Incidentally the case seems to confirm In re Irish (1889) 40 Ch. D. 49, 58 L. J. Ch. 279, where the court refused to restrain a person from opening a competing business with that of which he had been previously appointed receiver and manager, and which had been sold. In commenting upon the report of In re Altsop (ante, pp. 140 141), we pointed out that the decision of the Court of Appeal confirmed the reading of sect. 3 of the Judicial Trustee Act, ...