Image from Google Jackets

Summerfield Stores Ltd v Spring (Sutton Coldfield) Ltd (in administration) [electronic resource]

Language: English Publication details: 2010Subject(s): Online resources: Summary: [2010] EWHC 2084 (Ch), 4 August 2010. Appellant business tenant SU appealed against the dismissal of its application for summary judgment to dismiss the opposition by the respondent landlord SP of its application for new tenancies. Was a tenant who had applied for summary judgment of the ground of opposition entitled to that judgment if he could show that the landlord had no real prospect of establishing the requisite intention at a date determined by reference to the date of the summary judgment hearing rather than the date of a prospective trial?. The court dismissed SU's application. SU appealed. "Held": appeal dismissed. The date of the hearing at which the necessary intention had to be shown to exist was always the date of the substantive trial of the landlord's ground of objection.
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number Copy number Status Barcode
Law report Virtual Online ONLINE PUBLICATION (Browse shelf(Opens below)) 1 Available 154667-2001

[2010] EWHC 2084 (Ch), 4 August 2010. Appellant business tenant SU appealed against the dismissal of its application for summary judgment to dismiss the opposition by the respondent landlord SP of its application for new tenancies. Was a tenant who had applied for summary judgment of the ground of opposition entitled to that judgment if he could show that the landlord had no real prospect of establishing the requisite intention at a date determined by reference to the date of the summary judgment hearing rather than the date of a prospective trial?. The court dismissed SU's application. SU appealed. "Held": appeal dismissed. The date of the hearing at which the necessary intention had to be shown to exist was always the date of the substantive trial of the landlord's ground of objection.

Previous
Back to results
Next
Close