Rent review
Language: English Series: Estates Gazette Case Summaries ; (1994) EGCS 146(1) (11/8/94)Publication details: 1994Subject(s): Summary: "Bickenhall Engineering Co Ltd v Grandmet Restaurants Ltd" CA 29 July 1994. Following failure to agree rent at review, the lessor issued a writ for arrears of rent in accordance with the lease provisions. Argument arose as to whether time was of the essence in serving a counternotice. Judgment for the lessor, but the lessee appealed successfully with the CA deciding that a rebuttal presumption meant that no time limit applied to the counternotice.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | WB3031-44 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 30197-1001 |
Browsing London shelves, Shelving location: Journal article Close shelf browser (Hides shelf browser)
| No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | ||
| WB3031-23 Permitted development | WB3031-42 Determination of lease | WB3031-43 Damages for breach of contract | WB3031-44 Rent review | WB3031-45 Rent review | WB3031-46 Rogan v Woodfield Building Services | WB3031-56 Material considerations |
"Bickenhall Engineering Co Ltd v Grandmet Restaurants Ltd" CA 29 July 1994. Following failure to agree rent at review, the lessor issued a writ for arrears of rent in accordance with the lease provisions. Argument arose as to whether time was of the essence in serving a counternotice. Judgment for the lessor, but the lessee appealed successfully with the CA deciding that a rebuttal presumption meant that no time limit applied to the counternotice.