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
  • 23 October 2026
  • Litigation and dispute resolution

Section 172 Companies Act 2006: Key lessons from Saxon Woods v Costa

The Supreme Court’s decision in Saxon Woods v Costa UKSC 21 clarifies directors’ duties under Section 172 Companies Act 2006, confirming that good faith requires both honest belief and appropriate conduct.

art
  • 22 October 2026
  • Corporate and M&A

Shareholders’ Agreements for Founders and Investors – SHA Series Part 3 of 5

A shareholders’ agreement is arguably one of the most valuable corporate governance agreements (along with articles of association) in any private UK company with more than one shareholder.

art
  • 19 October 2026
  • Immigration

Right to Work Checks: Are UK businesses becoming immigration enforcement officers?

The UK’s Right to Work regime has undergone a significant expansion, with changes taking effect from 1 October 2026.

art
  • 15 October 2026

Clarkslegal celebrates continued success in Chambers and Partners UK 2027

Clarkslegal is delighted to announce that we have once again been recognised by Chambers and Partners UK 2027, celebrating continued success across the firm and a number of enhanced individual rankings.

Pub
  • 15 October 2026
  • Privacy and Data Protection

Data breaches and ICO investigations: Responding with confidence

In this podcast Harry Berryman and Zahra Navarro discuss recent ICO enforcement action, common causes of data breaches, and the practical steps organisations should take to respond effectively when incidents occur.

art
  • 14 October 2026
  • Litigation and dispute resolution

London Court of International Arbitration v International Chamber of Commerce: Key differences

Compare LCIA and ICC arbitration rules, costs, confidentiality provisions and expedited procedures. Learn the key differences between these leading international arbitration institutions and how to choose the right option for your commercial dispute.