Image from Google Jackets

Boots the Chemists Ltd v Pinkland Ltd ; Thorn EMI plc v same

Language: English Series: Estates Gazette ; (1992) 28 EG 118-120(3)Publication details: 1992Subject(s): Summary: County Court 13 April 1992. The defendants, P, owned the Elephant and Castle Shopping Centre and the plaintiff, B and T, occupied two units. T occupied unit 303 under a 21-year lease dated 3 April 1964. B occupied 2 units one under a ground lease granted in February 1965 for 21 years amended by a deed of variation. In August 1983 various questions needed to be resolved following applications for new tenancies under Landlord and Tenant Act 1954. The questions being for B re a positive trading covenant, whether the rent review was upwards/downwards or only upwards and the hypothetical term at rent reviews; for T the length of term and for both of them the management fees. Dispute arose as to whether T wished a three or ten year extension of the lease which changed T`s attitude towards T`s disputes. B sought to resist a positive trading covenant in their lease as only one of their previous leases contained one and now the two leases had been combined. It was held that this covenant shou
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number Copy number Status Barcode
Law report London Journal article ABS46771 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) 1 Available 59453-1001

County Court 13 April 1992. The defendants, P, owned the Elephant and Castle Shopping Centre and the plaintiff, B and T, occupied two units. T occupied unit 303 under a 21-year lease dated 3 April 1964. B occupied 2 units one under a ground lease granted in February 1965 for 21 years amended by a deed of variation. In August 1983 various questions needed to be resolved following applications for new tenancies under Landlord and Tenant Act 1954. The questions being for B re a positive trading covenant, whether the rent review was upwards/downwards or only upwards and the hypothetical term at rent reviews; for T the length of term and for both of them the management fees. Dispute arose as to whether T wished a three or ten year extension of the lease which changed T`s attitude towards T`s disputes. B sought to resist a positive trading covenant in their lease as only one of their previous leases contained one and now the two leases had been combined. It was held that this covenant shou