Rule in Dumpor's Case

Property law
Part of the common law series
Types
Personal property Community property Real property Unowned property
Acquisition
Gift Adverse possession Deed Conquest Discovery Accession Lost, mislaid, and abandoned property Treasure trove Bailment License Alienation
Estates in land
Allodial title Fee simple Fee tail Life estate Defeasible estate Future interest remainder Concurrent estate Leasehold estate Condominiums Real estate Land tenure
Conveyancing
Bona fide purchaser Torrens title Strata title Deeds registration Estoppel by deed Quitclaim deed Mortgage Equitable conversion Action to quiet title Escheat
Future use control
Restraint on alienation Rule against perpetuities Rule in Shelley's Case Doctrine of worthier title
Nonpossessory interest
Lien Easement Profit Usufruct Covenant Equitable servitude
Related topics
Fixtures Waste Partition Practicing without a license Property rights Mineral rights Water rights prior appropriation riparian Lateral and subjacent support Assignment Nemo dat Quicquid plantatur Conflict of property laws Blackacre Security deposit
Other common law areas
Contract law Tort law Wills, trusts and estates Criminal law Evidence Higher category: Law and Common law
v t e

The Rule in Dumpor's Case is a common law rule of property law first set forth by Sir Edward Coke in 1578 (4 Coke 119b [1578]), in the case of Dumpor v. Syms. In its most basic form, it states that once a landlord has consented to an assignment of a tenant's interest in a leasehold estate, the landlord implicitly consents to all future assignments by the assignee.

This rule is still operative in some U.S. states and some other jurisdictions which follow English common law. The rule was abolished in England in 1859, as it has been in a number of U.S. states, but this does not automatically invalidate the rule in other jurisdictions which follow English common law. Parties sometimes seek to contract around the rule by putting a clause in the lease agreement (or in the document approving an assignment) reserving the landlord's right to approve or disapprove a future assignment. Whether this is valid, or how the parties may circumvent the rule in a different way if they are in a jurisdiction that follows the rule, depends the law of the jurisdiction where the real property is located.

• Law review article mentioning the rule

This article relating to law in the United Kingdom, or its constituent jurisdictions, is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

• v
• t
• e