ABSTRACT
Termination of leases has been a contentious area of late, with much ink being spilt on the proposed termination order Bill, which would replace the ageing and unnecessarily complex forfeiture provisions currently in force. This chapter shows that what the decision in Hussein v Mehlman has actually created is a fool’s paradise in English law, as there are many unappreciated but potentially very high costs which the tenant may have to endure for the inclusion of a right to terminate his tenancy, which have the potential to far outweigh any benefits received. Nor are the detriments necessarily limited to the tenant alone. The chapter focuses on a long overdue juggernaut through the popular impression that the contractualisation of leases is a welcome development and illustrates that is only by means of a strict property law approach that the potential damage caused by the introduction of repudiatory breach can be satisfactorily limited.
