Rent Act 1977
Language: English Series: EGCS ; 1990 73Publication details: 1990Subject(s): Summary: In Steele and another v McMahon and another , CA 23 May 1990, it was held that the balance of the premium did fall within one of the exceptions to Rent Act 1977 s120 , The exception concerned any expenditure incurred by the assignor in carrying out alterations or providing fixtures. The plaintiffs contention that the expenditure was incurred before the assignors became tenants by the grant of the lease and therefore the exception did not apply was wrong. It was necessary that the expenditure had to be incurred by the assignors only after they became tenants.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| News article | London News article | WB2622-40 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 70799-1001 |
In Steele and another v McMahon and another , CA 23 May 1990, it was held that the balance of the premium did fall within one of the exceptions to Rent Act 1977 s120 , The exception concerned any expenditure incurred by the assignor in carrying out alterations or providing fixtures. The plaintiffs contention that the expenditure was incurred before the assignors became tenants by the grant of the lease and therefore the exception did not apply was wrong. It was necessary that the expenditure had to be incurred by the assignors only after they became tenants.