Tiffany Investments Ltd and another v Bircham and Co Nominees (No 2) Ltd and others
Tiffany Investments Ltd and another v Bircham and Co Nominees (No 2) Ltd and others
- 2003
- Property, Planning and Compensation Reports [2003] 2 P&CR 381-396(16) .
[2003] EWHC 143 (Ch), 7 February 2003. Cl5 of a residential property lease provided that the lessee wishing to dispose of the lease should first offer it to the lessors. Two of the defendants, the Bailies, (BA) sought to sell the lease to claimant (T) but were advised that they were not entitled to enfranchise. T and the second claimant (C) were given benefit of the lease by BA. T agreed to sell the lease to C. In proceedings by the lessors (B), BA agreed to transfer the lease to the lessors in compliance with cl5. T and C claimed an interest in the lease. "Held" claim dismissed. Judgment for (B). An equitable interest in the lease in favour of B had been created by BA's failure in compliance with cl5 to offer B the lease not later than immediately before entering into an enforceable contract of sale of the lease to T. As no offer was made to B, no contract which fell foul of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 s17 was made with them.
EQUITABLE INTERESTS
LEASEHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT
ALLNATT LONDON PROPERTIES LTD V NEWTON
BIRCHAM AND CO NOMINEES (NO 2) LTD AND ANOTHER V WORRELL HOLDINGS LTD
TIFFANY INVESTMENTS LTD AND ANOTHER V BIRCHAM AND CO NOMINEES (NO 2 ) LTD AND OTHERS
ASSIGNMENT OF LEASES
KING V KESTON PROPERTIES
SURRENDER
PRE-EMPTION CLAUSES
LANDLORD AND TENANT ACT 1954 S17
[2003] EWHC 143 (Ch), 7 February 2003. Cl5 of a residential property lease provided that the lessee wishing to dispose of the lease should first offer it to the lessors. Two of the defendants, the Bailies, (BA) sought to sell the lease to claimant (T) but were advised that they were not entitled to enfranchise. T and the second claimant (C) were given benefit of the lease by BA. T agreed to sell the lease to C. In proceedings by the lessors (B), BA agreed to transfer the lease to the lessors in compliance with cl5. T and C claimed an interest in the lease. "Held" claim dismissed. Judgment for (B). An equitable interest in the lease in favour of B had been created by BA's failure in compliance with cl5 to offer B the lease not later than immediately before entering into an enforceable contract of sale of the lease to T. As no offer was made to B, no contract which fell foul of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 s17 was made with them.
EQUITABLE INTERESTS
LEASEHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT
ALLNATT LONDON PROPERTIES LTD V NEWTON
BIRCHAM AND CO NOMINEES (NO 2) LTD AND ANOTHER V WORRELL HOLDINGS LTD
TIFFANY INVESTMENTS LTD AND ANOTHER V BIRCHAM AND CO NOMINEES (NO 2 ) LTD AND OTHERS
ASSIGNMENT OF LEASES
KING V KESTON PROPERTIES
SURRENDER
PRE-EMPTION CLAUSES
LANDLORD AND TENANT ACT 1954 S17