Whose grease is it anyway?

A not-so-glamorous case in the High Court, concerning a leaky ventilation duct, sets out some important principles in relation to the extent of the property demised by a lease.

HLS Leisure Ltd v Darville and Son Ltd [2025] EWHC 1884 (Ch) was an appeal from a decision of the County Court.

The claimant ran a business called Pinks Gentlemen's Club, and the entrance to its premises was not at street level, but rather via a covered loading bay at the back of its landlord's property. A ventilation duct from a fast-food restaurant in the same building evacuated into the loading bay, near the entrance to the claimant's property.

The claimant sued its landlord,  and alleged that the ventilation duct was unacceptably noisy and leaked grease into the loading bay, creating an uncomfortable environment for its customers and staff. However, the landlord denied that it was responsible for the ventilation duct on the basis that it formed part of the property demised to the fast-food restaurant.

Under the leases in question, the loading bay was deemed to be among the "common parts" of the landlord's building. As such, the landlord was responsible for its maintenance and upkeep. However, notwithstanding this, the Court held that the ventilation duct was part of the property included in the fast-food restaurant's lease.

In the usual way, the lease to the fast-food restaurant attached a plan outlining the extent of the property included in the lease. The ventilation duct was outside the boundaries of the lease plan.

However, based on the wording of the lease in question, the Court held that because the ventilation system originated in the fast-food restaurant, it was excluded from the landlord's common parts, even though part of it was physically located within the loading bay.

This case serves as a reminder to both landlords and tenants that leases require careful interpretation and that items falling outside the ostensible boundaries of a property can sometimes be deemed to be within them.

As in the matter of HLS Leisure Ltd v Darville and Son Ltd, the question of what is within the boundaries of a property can have significant ramifications, and is a critical part of the case analysis process in all property-related claims.

If you are unsure about the extent of the boundaries to your property, or your obligations to neighbouring owners, do get in touch and we would be glad to assist.