In QFS Scaffolding Limited v Sable and another [2010] EWCA Civ 682, the Court of Appeal held that there had not been a surrender by operation of law as the tenant had not conducted itself in a manner that was unequivocally inconsistent with the continuation of the lease.

The tenant's business was struggling and administrative receivers were appointed. A third party (occupier) moved into the property and negotiated with the landlord for a new lease. The new lease was not concluded; instead the occupier took an assignment of the existing lease.

The landlord argued that the occupier had occupied the property as a tenant at will during the lease negotiations, which brought about a surrender of the lease by operation of law. The Court of Appeal did not agree.

This case does not expound any new legal principles with regard to surrender by operation of law. The law was, and still is, that conduct that is inconsistent with the continuation of the lease will amount to a surrender by operation of law. However, this case is a useful illustration of conduct that is insufficient to infer a surrender by operation of law.