Image from Google Jackets

Aslan v Berkeley House Properties Ltd

Language: English Series: Estates Gazette ; (1990) 37 EG 81-86(4)Publication details: 1990Subject(s): Summary: CA 17 May 1990. Properties were held by A under three separate leases . Each lease contained a break clause that if the landlords wished to redevelop or demolish the premises six months written notice should be given to the tenant. In 1983 A decided to sell the leases. In 1984 it was found that A had removed seven valuable fireplaces and sold them. It was made clear that A must recover them or the landlord, H. would take action for breach of covenant . It was agreed that if they could not be recovered A would replace them. While surveyors were visiting the premises regarding this matter it was noticed that they were in a condition where redevelopment was possible, however it was not clear whether the break clauses would be invoked. On 2 April H`s surveyor arranged to call on A two days later to discuss the fireplaces. On 3 April A found a buyer for the properties, B. Draft leases were inspected and B had prior knowledge of the break clauses. The sale was not subject to the landlords
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number Copy number Status Barcode
Law report London Journal article ABS43573 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) 1 Available 42399-1001

CA 17 May 1990. Properties were held by A under three separate leases . Each lease contained a break clause that if the landlords wished to redevelop or demolish the premises six months written notice should be given to the tenant. In 1983 A decided to sell the leases. In 1984 it was found that A had removed seven valuable fireplaces and sold them. It was made clear that A must recover them or the landlord, H. would take action for breach of covenant . It was agreed that if they could not be recovered A would replace them. While surveyors were visiting the premises regarding this matter it was noticed that they were in a condition where redevelopment was possible, however it was not clear whether the break clauses would be invoked. On 2 April H`s surveyor arranged to call on A two days later to discuss the fireplaces. On 3 April A found a buyer for the properties, B. Draft leases were inspected and B had prior knowledge of the break clauses. The sale was not subject to the landlords