Brewers Company v Viewplan PLC
Brewers Company v Viewplan PLC
- 1989
- Estates Gazette (1989) 45 153-156(2) .
ChD 17 May 1989 Originating summons by Brewers Company (B), raising a question of construction of user provisions in a lease which were relevant to the operation of a rent review clause. In a 1983 lease of a technology centre a recital provided that references in the lease to "the Planning Acts" were deemed to include an statutory modification or re-enactment thereof for the time being in force and to also include any statutory instruments being in force thereunder. A user covenant provided inter alia for use for the lessees business "or with the consent of the landlord such consent not to be unreasonably withheld any other use within Class 3 of Use Classes Order 1972 ". B sought for construction to establish that reference to Class 3 in the user covenant should now be taken to refer to class B1 of the Use Classes Order 1987 , thus widening the class of uses for which consent could not unreasonably be withheld to include office use. ChD held, dismissing the summons, that the draftsma
BUSINESS TENANCIES
ChD 17 May 1989 Originating summons by Brewers Company (B), raising a question of construction of user provisions in a lease which were relevant to the operation of a rent review clause. In a 1983 lease of a technology centre a recital provided that references in the lease to "the Planning Acts" were deemed to include an statutory modification or re-enactment thereof for the time being in force and to also include any statutory instruments being in force thereunder. A user covenant provided inter alia for use for the lessees business "or with the consent of the landlord such consent not to be unreasonably withheld any other use within Class 3 of Use Classes Order 1972 ". B sought for construction to establish that reference to Class 3 in the user covenant should now be taken to refer to class B1 of the Use Classes Order 1987 , thus widening the class of uses for which consent could not unreasonably be withheld to include office use. ChD held, dismissing the summons, that the draftsma
BUSINESS TENANCIES