Image from Google Jackets

Atwal v Courts Garages

Language: English Series: Estates Gazette ; (1989) 07 EG 78-82(3)Publication details: 1989Subject(s): Summary: CA 29 September 1988. Appeal and cross-appeal from decision on construction of user covenant . A and C are occupants of different parts of a garage and filling station. A occupies the forecourt, carrying out the business of a petrol-filling station ; and runs a shop from which he sells car accessories and confectionary. C occupies a car showroom and workshops. A`s lease precludes the carrying on any business on the premises without the landlord`s consent, except for "that of a garage with car sales and service station with office accommodation ...". C`s underlease prohibited the carrying on of any business "except that of a garage with car sales and vehicle repair". C`s predecessors in title had a counter within the showroom, from which they sold car accessories. C expanded this activity, widening the range of goods and improving the window display looking on to the forecourt. A objected, claiming a breach of user covenant. In the previous decision it was held that the business autho
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number Copy number Status Barcode
Law report London Journal article ABS40499 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) 1 Available 24328-1001

CA 29 September 1988. Appeal and cross-appeal from decision on construction of user covenant . A and C are occupants of different parts of a garage and filling station. A occupies the forecourt, carrying out the business of a petrol-filling station ; and runs a shop from which he sells car accessories and confectionary. C occupies a car showroom and workshops. A`s lease precludes the carrying on any business on the premises without the landlord`s consent, except for "that of a garage with car sales and service station with office accommodation ...". C`s underlease prohibited the carrying on of any business "except that of a garage with car sales and vehicle repair". C`s predecessors in title had a counter within the showroom, from which they sold car accessories. C expanded this activity, widening the range of goods and improving the window display looking on to the forecourt. A objected, claiming a breach of user covenant. In the previous decision it was held that the business autho