Adagio Properties Ltd v Ansari
Language: English Series: Estates Gazette ; [1998] 35 EG 86-89(4) (29 August 1998)Publication details: 1998Subject(s): Summary: "Adagio Properties Ltd v Ansari" CA 22 January 1998. By an underlease dated 24 May 1960 the respondent tenant held the remainder of a 90-year term of a flat. The underlease was subject to covenants that permitted the appellant landlord to enter and inspect the premises and prohibited certain alterations without the landlord`s written consent. In 1992 a request by the landlord`s gents to inspect the premises was denied. A visit, peering the windows, revealed that alterations had been carried out to flat contrary to the covenants. The tenant had divided the flat into two separate dwellings. The landlord served a notice under the Law of Property Act 1925 s146 alleging that the flat had been divided without consent. The county court judge held that the landlord`s notice was invalid for uncertainty. The landlord appealed. Held: Appeal was allowed. The notice did comply with requirements of s146 of the Act.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | ABS59325 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 88568-1001 |
"Adagio Properties Ltd v Ansari" CA 22 January 1998. By an underlease dated 24 May 1960 the respondent tenant held the remainder of a 90-year term of a flat. The underlease was subject to covenants that permitted the appellant landlord to enter and inspect the premises and prohibited certain alterations without the landlord`s written consent. In 1992 a request by the landlord`s gents to inspect the premises was denied. A visit, peering the windows, revealed that alterations had been carried out to flat contrary to the covenants. The tenant had divided the flat into two separate dwellings. The landlord served a notice under the Law of Property Act 1925 s146 alleging that the flat had been divided without consent. The county court judge held that the landlord`s notice was invalid for uncertainty. The landlord appealed. Held: Appeal was allowed. The notice did comply with requirements of s146 of the Act.