Starmark Enterprises Ltd v CPL Distribution Ltd (Record no. 65407)
[ view plain ]
| 000 -LEADER | |
|---|---|
| fixed length control field | 01595cam a2200241 4500 |
| 001 - CONTROL NUMBER | |
| control field | ABS63199 |
| 008 - FIXED-LENGTH DATA ELEMENTS--GENERAL INFORMATION | |
| fixed length control field | 000000n2000 000 0 eng u |
| 035 ## - SYSTEM CONTROL NUMBER | |
| System control number | (Sirsi) u109559 |
| 245 ## - TITLE STATEMENT | |
| Title | Starmark Enterprises Ltd v CPL Distribution Ltd |
| 260 ## - PUBLICATION, DISTRIBUTION, ETC. | |
| Date of publication, distribution, etc. | 2000 |
| 490 ## - SERIES STATEMENT | |
| Series statement | Estates Gazette |
| Volume/sequential designation | [2000] 46 EG 196-201(6) |
| 520 ## - SUMMARY, ETC. | |
| Summary, etc. | ChD 6 June 2000. By a lease dated 21 February 1984, the claimant tenant (C) held a lease of commercial premises from the defendant landlord (S). The rent review clause allowed for the landlord to serve a notice for increased rent, and this rent would be payable unless the tenant served a counternotice within one month. On 30 March 1999 C served a notice to increase the rent to £84,800. S served a counternotice on 16 June 1999, stating the rent should be £52,725. C claimed the counternotice was not served in time, and therefore the tenant had agreed to pay £84,800. S issued proceedings regarding the validity of the rent review. "Held" for S. Following the CA decision in "Mecca Leisure Ltd v Renown Investments (Holdings) Ltd", the tenant's counternotice was declared valid; time is not of the essence of a rent review clause, except in rare cases. |
| 590 ## - LOCAL NOTE (RLIN) | |
| Local note | ABS |
| 650 ## - SUBJECT ADDED ENTRY--TOPICAL TERM | |
| Topical term or geographic name entry element | COUNTER NOTICE |
| 650 ## - SUBJECT ADDED ENTRY--TOPICAL TERM | |
| Topical term or geographic name entry element | STARMARK ENTERPRISES V CPL DISTRIBUTION |
| 650 ## - SUBJECT ADDED ENTRY--TOPICAL TERM | |
| Topical term or geographic name entry element | RENT REVIEW CLAUSES |
| 650 ## - SUBJECT ADDED ENTRY--TOPICAL TERM | |
| Topical term or geographic name entry element | TIME NOT OF THE ESSENCE |
| 650 ## - SUBJECT ADDED ENTRY--TOPICAL TERM | |
| Topical term or geographic name entry element | TIME LIMITS |
| 650 ## - SUBJECT ADDED ENTRY--TOPICAL TERM | |
| Topical term or geographic name entry element | HENRY SMITHS CHARITY TRUSTEES V AWADA |
| 650 ## - SUBJECT ADDED ENTRY--TOPICAL TERM | |
| Topical term or geographic name entry element | MECCA LEISURE LTD V RENOWN INVESTMENTS HOLDINGS LTD |
| 690 ## - LOCAL SUBJECT ADDED ENTRY--TOPICAL TERM (OCLC, RLIN) | |
| Topical term or geographic name as entry element | LANDLORD AND TENANT-RENT REVIEWS-CASE LAW |
| 942 ## - ADDED ENTRY ELEMENTS (KOHA) | |
| Suppress in OPAC | 0 |
| Withdrawn status | Lost status | Source of classification or shelving scheme | Damaged status | Not for loan | Home library | Current library | Shelving location | Date acquired | Total Checkouts | Full call number | Barcode | Date last seen | Copy number | Price effective from | Koha item type |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dewey Decimal Classification | London | London | Journal article | 29/11/2000 | ABS63199 | 109559-1001 | 06/08/2019 | 1 | 06/08/2019 | Law report |