Maryland Estates Ltd v Joseph and Another
Language: English Series: Weekly Law Reports ; [1999] 1 WLR 83-92(6)Publication details: 1999Subject(s): Summary: CA 23 April 1998. Landlord (M) sought an order for possession for a flat for breach of covenant to pay outstanding rent and service charges, together with mesne profits from the date of service of the writ until possession. Tenants (J&A) disputed the claim and counterclaimed relief against forfeiture. M agreed to grant relief from forfeiture on payment of all the sums claimed within a reasonable time. J&A paid the amount of rent and service charges outstanding at the date of the writ, and a sum towards M`s costs. M applied for a declaration that it was entitled to possession unless all outstanding rent and service charges were paid with interest. The Deputy District Judge declared M was entitled only to the arrears due on the date of service of the writ, not to mesne profits. On appeal by M, "held" that `all the rent in arrears` referred to rent in arrears at the time the court, making its order, assumed that payment of that rent would result in the lease continuing for all purposes.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | ABS60004 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 90996-1001 |
CA 23 April 1998. Landlord (M) sought an order for possession for a flat for breach of covenant to pay outstanding rent and service charges, together with mesne profits from the date of service of the writ until possession. Tenants (J&A) disputed the claim and counterclaimed relief against forfeiture. M agreed to grant relief from forfeiture on payment of all the sums claimed within a reasonable time. J&A paid the amount of rent and service charges outstanding at the date of the writ, and a sum towards M`s costs. M applied for a declaration that it was entitled to possession unless all outstanding rent and service charges were paid with interest. The Deputy District Judge declared M was entitled only to the arrears due on the date of service of the writ, not to mesne profits. On appeal by M, "held" that `all the rent in arrears` referred to rent in arrears at the time the court, making its order, assumed that payment of that rent would result in the lease continuing for all purposes.