Image from Google Jackets

Aspinall Finance Ltd v Viscount Chelsea

Language: English Series: Estates Gazette ; (1989) 09 EG 77-82(4)Publication details: 1989Subject(s): Summary: ChD 12 October 1988 An originating summons by Aspinall (A) to resolve a preliminary issue arising out of an application for a new tenancy under Landlord and Tenant Act 1954. The issue was whether A had been in occupation , throughout the relevant period, for the purpose of their business as required by s23 of the Act. The premises were used as a gaming club until 1984 under a Gaming Board Licence. A wished to run a club in a more attractive building in a different area, but a licence would only be granted if the licence for the subject premises was given up. This was agreed and gaming activity ceased and the building became empty. In 1986 A applied for a new lease. ChD held that as the premises had been empty for some time as a result of the transfer of the gaming licence to another establishment, the cessation of business occupation prevented the Act from applying and therefore A was not entitled to a new tenancy.
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number Copy number Status Barcode
Law report London Journal article ABS40498 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) 1 Available 24322-1001

ChD 12 October 1988 An originating summons by Aspinall (A) to resolve a preliminary issue arising out of an application for a new tenancy under Landlord and Tenant Act 1954. The issue was whether A had been in occupation , throughout the relevant period, for the purpose of their business as required by s23 of the Act. The premises were used as a gaming club until 1984 under a Gaming Board Licence. A wished to run a club in a more attractive building in a different area, but a licence would only be granted if the licence for the subject premises was given up. This was agreed and gaming activity ceased and the building became empty. In 1986 A applied for a new lease. ChD held that as the premises had been empty for some time as a result of the transfer of the gaming licence to another establishment, the cessation of business occupation prevented the Act from applying and therefore A was not entitled to a new tenancy.