The landlord appealed against refusal of forfeiture for breaches of the lease. A covenant provided against use for immoral purposes, and the sub-tenant had been found to be running a brothel. The tenant said that he had been concerned of an action for defamation if he had acted before receiving formal confirmation of the allegation from the police. The landlord also complained of a non-consented alienation of part of the premises. The Court of Appeal held that the tenant had not been justified in waiting three months before acting. The tenant had duties under the lease and did not comply with them. As to the alienation, the occupiers had been sharing the accommodation in breach of the covenant and were not just managing the business. They were in breach, though this was remediable. Relief from forfeiture would be granted, as forfeiture would provide an unearned windfall to the landlords and a disproportionate financial penalty on the tenants.