Image from Google Jackets

Trailfinders v Razuki

Language: English Series: Estates Gazette ; 30 July 1988, 59-62(3)Publication details: 1988Subject(s): Summary: ChD 15 December 1987 Trailfinders Ltd (T) sought declarations and injunctions against Razuki (R), in support of their claim to be allowed to place computer cables on property leased to R. T, a firm of travel agents were owners of various properties, one of which was lease d to R, also a travel agent. R`s lease contained a reservation in favour of T of the uninterrupted running and passage of, among other things, electric current from other buildings of T through the pipes, wires and other conduits "which are now, or may hereafter during the term hereby granted, be in, under or over the said demised premises". The issue was whether, under this reservation and the general law as to reservations and easements , T was entitled to pass the necessary cables for their computer link-up across and over R`s property in order to reach the terminals of T`s own nearby property. ChD held that T was not entitled under the reservation to enter and lay computer cables, which were cables of an entirel
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number Copy number Status Barcode
Law report London Journal article ABS39511 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) 1 Available 17238-1001

ChD 15 December 1987 Trailfinders Ltd (T) sought declarations and injunctions against Razuki (R), in support of their claim to be allowed to place computer cables on property leased to R. T, a firm of travel agents were owners of various properties, one of which was lease d to R, also a travel agent. R`s lease contained a reservation in favour of T of the uninterrupted running and passage of, among other things, electric current from other buildings of T through the pipes, wires and other conduits "which are now, or may hereafter during the term hereby granted, be in, under or over the said demised premises". The issue was whether, under this reservation and the general law as to reservations and easements , T was entitled to pass the necessary cables for their computer link-up across and over R`s property in order to reach the terminals of T`s own nearby property. ChD held that T was not entitled under the reservation to enter and lay computer cables, which were cables of an entirel