Lyndendown Ltd v Vitamol Ltd [electronic resource]
Language: English Publication details: 2007Subject(s): Online resources: Summary: [2007] EWCA Civ 826 6 July 2007. Court of Appeal (Civil division). Case No: B/1/2006/1436. Case concerned the rights and obligations of landlord and tenant for repairs under a business lease. The appellant owned the freehold reversion of two units on an industrial estate. The respondent's tenancy of the units was subject to Part II of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 and contained a covenant to deliver up the property and to pay for any dilapidations. The appellant granted the tenant a license to sublet the units to a third party bound to observe and perform the covenants in the headlease, but in a side letter the tenant's parent company gave an undertaking to the sub-tenant that its obligations to repair would be limited to making the property wind and watertight. After the headlease expired the sub-tenant remained in occupation. Appellant commenced proceedings against the tenant for breach of the repairing covenants. Issues: whether appellant was entitled to any damages for dilapidations; whether a side letter resulted in diminution in value of reversion. Held: appeal dismissed. The side letter did not affect the value of the reversion and there was no error of law in the original decision.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | Virtual Online | ONLINE PUBLICATION (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 140196-1001 |
[2007] EWCA Civ 826 6 July 2007. Court of Appeal (Civil division). Case No: B/1/2006/1436. Case concerned the rights and obligations of landlord and tenant for repairs under a business lease. The appellant owned the freehold reversion of two units on an industrial estate. The respondent's tenancy of the units was subject to Part II of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 and contained a covenant to deliver up the property and to pay for any dilapidations. The appellant granted the tenant a license to sublet the units to a third party bound to observe and perform the covenants in the headlease, but in a side letter the tenant's parent company gave an undertaking to the sub-tenant that its obligations to repair would be limited to making the property wind and watertight. After the headlease expired the sub-tenant remained in occupation. Appellant commenced proceedings against the tenant for breach of the repairing covenants. Issues: whether appellant was entitled to any damages for dilapidations; whether a side letter resulted in diminution in value of reversion. Held: appeal dismissed. The side letter did not affect the value of the reversion and there was no error of law in the original decision.