Rent review
Language: English Series: EGCS ; 1989 43Publication details: 1989Subject(s): Summary: In Trusthouse Forte Albany Hotels Ltd v Daejan Investments Ltd No 2, CA 17 March 1989, it was held that the review clause presupposes a hypothetical letting of the whole of the areas edged in red on the plans. Two extra red lines, which at one point, arbitrarily divided an area used as a bank into two areas must be attributed to a clerical error for they did not appear on the counterpart underlease. The appeal was allowed on this issue and it must be assumed that all the areas edged in red are being let under a single lease. However the appellants contention that the areas edged in red were to be valued on the basis that they are available for letting both for shopping and retail purposes, and for any other purpose permitted by the lease and public law, was not accepted.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| News article | London News article | WB2512-42 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 32037-1001 |
In Trusthouse Forte Albany Hotels Ltd v Daejan Investments Ltd No 2, CA 17 March 1989, it was held that the review clause presupposes a hypothetical letting of the whole of the areas edged in red on the plans. Two extra red lines, which at one point, arbitrarily divided an area used as a bank into two areas must be attributed to a clerical error for they did not appear on the counterpart underlease. The appeal was allowed on this issue and it must be assumed that all the areas edged in red are being let under a single lease. However the appellants contention that the areas edged in red were to be valued on the basis that they are available for letting both for shopping and retail purposes, and for any other purpose permitted by the lease and public law, was not accepted.