Search

How can we help?

Icon

Vacant Possession: Do I have to remove partitions?

The exercise of break clauses can cause tenants great difficulty, especially where the break clause is subject to conditions.  It is common for break clauses to require “vacant possession” and it can be difficult for a tenant to know what exactly this requires them to do.  One question which comes up frequently is whether it is necessary to remove partitions in order to give vacant possession.

It will always be necessary to look at the terms of the lease and licence for alterations in every case.  However the general view until now has been that partitions are virtually always fixed to a building and that, if there is any substantial connection between the partition and the building it will be treated as a “fixture”.  This means that it becomes part of the leased premises and, unless there is a separate obligation to remove the partition in (for example) a licence for alterations, leaving such partitions behind will not prevent there being vacant possession.

In a case handed down at the end of July in the Leeds District Registry, Riverside Park Limited -v- NHS Property Services Limited, the court considered the impact of partitions on the delivery of vacant possession.  In that case the partitions were in the form of metal stud partitions with painted plasterboard connected to the building by screw fixings.  The partitions were not solidly fixed to the floor or the ceiling and the court was satisfied that they could be demounted intact and potentially used elsewhere.  This was despite the fact that within the partitioning there were air-conditioning units and electrical wiring and sockets.

The consequence of the court finding (which some will find surprising) that these partitions had not become fixtures was that they remained chattels.  The tenant was therefore obliged to remove them and had not done so.  The court was satisfied that they did substantially prevent or interfere with the possession of the property and that, as a result, the tenant had failed to deliver up vacant possession.

 

It is common for break clauses to require “vacant possession

This case highlights once again the uncertainty that can surround the exercise of break clauses and the considerable importance of taking advice before it is too late on what needs to be done to ensure full and proper compliance and avoid the expensive consequences of an ineffective attempts to break a lease.

For further information on break clauses that require vacant possession please contact our Real Estate team property@clarkslegal.com 

Disclaimer

This information is for guidance purposes only and should not be regarded as a substitute for taking legal advice. Please refer to the full General Notices on our website.

Author profile

About this article

Read, listen and watch our latest insights

art
  • 10 September 2025
  • Commercial Real Estate

Trouble at the Table: The Challenges Facing the UK Hospitality Sector in the run up to Christmas 2025

The UK hospitality sector, long celebrated for its vibrancy and resilience, is facing a perfect storm of economic, operational, and structural challenges in 2025.

art
  • 09 September 2025
  • Commercial Real Estate

Le bail commercial anglais: quelques points essentiels à considérer

Typiquement, les baux commerciaux en Angleterre sont de court terme, d’une durée de 5 ou 10 ans, avec un loyer de marché et des ajustements du loyer périodiques en fonction de l’inflation ou d’autres facteurs. 

art
  • 09 September 2025
  • Corporate and M&A

The Failure to Prevent Fraud Offence – be prepared to avoid criminal liability

The failure to prevent fraud offence is a new corporate offence which has come into force on 1 September 2025.

art
  • 08 September 2025
  • Employment

Can employers still make changes to contracts after the Employment Rights Bill?

The short answer is yes but it will be much more difficult for employers following the introduction of the Employment Rights Bill because their ability to fairly dismiss employees who do not agree contractual changes is being restricted. 

art
  • 05 September 2025
  • Privacy and Data Protection

When Ignoring a DSAR Becomes a Criminal Offence

On 3 September 2025, Mr Jason Blake appeared at Beverley Magistrates Court and was fined for failing to respond to a data subject access request (DSAR).

art
  • 04 September 2025
  • Commercial Real Estate

Under the Hammer: essential tips for property auctions

This article explores the key considerations to keep in mind when selling or purchasing a property at auction.