Richurst Ltd v Pimenta and another
Richurst Ltd v Pimenta and another
- 1993
- Weekly Law Reports (1993) 1 WLR 159-167(5) .
ChD 18 September 1992. P as tenants, held a 34-year lease on property in Brighton owned by R. Lease terms provided for rent review every five years if notice was given more than two quarters in advance of review date, and established conditions for arbitration in the event of dispute. R served notice out of the specified time which was duly signed in acknowledgement and returned. R`s summons for an extension of time to serve the notice was granted under the terms of the Arbitration Act 1950. P appealed. Held that the notice was invalid, that the signature of receipt did not constitute an agreement for extension and that arbitration provisions in the lease were not applicable.
ARBITRATION ACT 1950 S27
EXTENSION OF TIME
RENT REVIEWS
TIME OF THE ESSENCE
ChD 18 September 1992. P as tenants, held a 34-year lease on property in Brighton owned by R. Lease terms provided for rent review every five years if notice was given more than two quarters in advance of review date, and established conditions for arbitration in the event of dispute. R served notice out of the specified time which was duly signed in acknowledgement and returned. R`s summons for an extension of time to serve the notice was granted under the terms of the Arbitration Act 1950. P appealed. Held that the notice was invalid, that the signature of receipt did not constitute an agreement for extension and that arbitration provisions in the lease were not applicable.
ARBITRATION ACT 1950 S27
EXTENSION OF TIME
RENT REVIEWS
TIME OF THE ESSENCE