Image from Google Jackets

Millshaw Property Co Ltd v Preston BC

Language: English Series: Rent Review & Lease Renewal ; 16(1) Summer 1996Publication details: 1996Subject(s): Summary: ChD 23 November 1995. P demised a plot of undeveloped land to M`s p predecessors. The lease required the tenant to carry out development on the demised land. Rent review referred to an arbitrator following a failure to agree on the revised rent. Review rent was to be determined on the basis of a hypothetical letting of the premises on specified terms and `for a term of years not exceeding the residue of the term at the date of the certificate`. M sought a declaration that the hypothetical lease should be the residue of the term remaining at the review date. P argued for a shorter period. "Held" the words `not exceeding` in the review clause meant `up to` and were words of limitation. Decision for landlord.
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number Copy number Status Barcode
Law report London Journal article ABS55560 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) 1 Available 17319-1001

ChD 23 November 1995. P demised a plot of undeveloped land to M`s p predecessors. The lease required the tenant to carry out development on the demised land. Rent review referred to an arbitrator following a failure to agree on the revised rent. Review rent was to be determined on the basis of a hypothetical letting of the premises on specified terms and `for a term of years not exceeding the residue of the term at the date of the certificate`. M sought a declaration that the hypothetical lease should be the residue of the term remaining at the review date. P argued for a shorter period. "Held" the words `not exceeding` in the review clause meant `up to` and were words of limitation. Decision for landlord.