Image from Google Jackets

McDonald's Property Co Ltd v HSBC Bank plc

Series: Estates Gazette ; [2001] 36 EG, 181-186(6)Publication details: 2001Subject(s): Summary: ChD 25 April 2001. Tenant (A) held a lease from landlord (B) at a rent subject to review, on the condition written notice was given within a specified period. It also provided a timetable for the determination of the rent. Notice triggering the first rent review was given late. A challenged the review contending that time was of the essenceand that, as it had been served late, the notice was not valid. A issued a Pt 8 claim, also contending there were compelling contra-indications. B issued an application to strike out A's claim. "Held": the claim and the appeal were dismissed. B's application was dismissed but A was ordered to pay the costs of the application. Time was not of the essence for the triggering of the rent review.
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number Copy number Status Barcode
Law report London Journal article ABS64571 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) 1 Available 114624-1001

ChD 25 April 2001. Tenant (A) held a lease from landlord (B) at a rent subject to review, on the condition written notice was given within a specified period. It also provided a timetable for the determination of the rent. Notice triggering the first rent review was given late. A challenged the review contending that time was of the essenceand that, as it had been served late, the notice was not valid. A issued a Pt 8 claim, also contending there were compelling contra-indications. B issued an application to strike out A's claim. "Held": the claim and the appeal were dismissed. B's application was dismissed but A was ordered to pay the costs of the application. Time was not of the essence for the triggering of the rent review.