HL 5 May 1988. Appeal by Alghussein (A) from CA decision affirming decision in favour of Eton (E). The appeal related to construction of a clause in a development agreement between E and a company, Suregrand (S), who later assigned their rights and obligations to A. Under the agreement E undertook to grant to S, later A: 1) a lease of a site in Camden and the development to be erected thereon, and 2) a licence to enter the site for the purpose of undertaking the development. The relevant clause stated that upon practical completion E would grant the lease provided "that if for any reason due to the wilful default of the tenant the development shall remain uncompleted on 29 September 1983 the lease shall forthwith be granted". It was suspected that the word "not" had been omitted from the clause and should have come before "due". Though A was pressed to commence work no start had been made by October 1984 and E took the view that the agreement was terminated through A`s repudiation. A