The Tropical Zoo Limited v The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Hounslow
[2024] EWHC 1240 (Ch)
Dr Monica Bijlani v Medical Express (London) Ltd
12 July 2024
[2024] EWHC 2246 (KB)
High Court
A dentist was suspended but still used her Harley Street office for Botox. The landlord wanted to evict her, but the judge said she could stay, as long as she follows the rules and pays what she owes. The judge also said the landlord broke the rules by blocking her windows and using cameras to spy on her.
Key Facts
- •Dr. Monica Bijlani (Claimant) sub-underleased a first-floor room at 117A Harley Street from Medical Express (London) Ltd (Defendant) for 20 years.
- •The lease permitted use as a consulting room for a registered dental practitioner.
- •The Claimant was suspended by the General Dental Council (GDC) in April 2021.
- •The Defendant issued two section 146 notices alleging breach of the lease due to the Claimant providing Botox treatments while suspended.
- •The Claimant admitted to providing Botox treatments while suspended but disputed other alleged breaches.
Legal Principles
Contractual interpretation requires identifying the parties' intention based on what a reasonable person would understand.
Investors Compensation Scheme v West Bromwich Building Society [1998] 1 WLR 896, Chartbrook Ltd v Persimmon Homes Ltd [2009] 1 AC 1101, Rainy Sky SA v Kookmin Bank [2011] 1 WLR 2900, Arnold v Britton [2015] AC 1619 and Wood v Capita Insurance Services [2017] AC 1173
A person whose dental registration is suspended is treated as not being registered under the Dentists Act 1984.
Dentists Act 1984, section 33(1)
Waiver of a breach of covenant extends only to that particular breach.
Chrisdell Ltd v Johnson and Tickner [1987] 54 P and CR 257 and section 148 of the Law of Property Act 1925
The court may grant relief from forfeiture, considering the parties' conduct and all circumstances.
Law of Property Act 1925, section 146(2)
Personal suitability of a tenant is important when their qualifications are crucial to the landlord's property.
Bathurst (Earl) v Fine [1974] 1 WLR 905
Outcomes
The Claimant's use of the premises for Botox treatments while suspended breached the lease.
The lease required the premises to be used by a fully registered dental practitioner. A suspended dentist is not considered fully registered.
The Defendant waived its right to forfeit the lease for breaches occurring before the end of January 2022 due to rent acceptance.
Acceptance of rent constitutes a waiver of forfeiture for preceding breaches.
Relief from forfeiture was granted.
While the breaches were serious, the claimant did not willfully breach the lease regarding Botox treatments, and there was no evidence of reputational damage to the landlord.
The Defendant's installation of double glazing that prevented window opening was a breach of the lease.
The lease granted the Claimant the right to use windows and balconies; this right was restricted.
The claim regarding the waiting room was dismissed.
The Claimant failed to prove patients were prevented from using the waiting room.
A declaration was granted that the Defendant's use of CCTV to monitor the Claimant's room was a breach of data protection legislation.
The installation and use of the CCTV was not for a legitimate purpose and infringed data protection rights.
The Defendant was awarded 95% of its costs on an indemnity basis.
The Claimant lost on most issues, but the court considered some of the Defendant's actions.
Similar Cases
29 Buckland Crescent Management Company Limited v Rojer Taylor White
[2024] EWHC 1480 (Ch)
Harmohinder Singh Gill (as Trustee of the Gilcrest UK Pension Scheme) v Lees News Limited
[2023] EWHC 403 (Ch)
Kwik-Fit Properties Ltd v Resham Ltd
[2024] EWCC 4
Leicester Square (2015) Limited & Ors v Empire Cinema 2 Limited
[2024] EWHC 2294 (Ch)