Aslan v Berkeley House Properties Ltd
Language: English Series: Estates Gazette ; (1990) 37 EG 81-86(4)Publication details: 1990Subject(s): Summary: CA 17 May 1990. Properties were held by A under three separate leases . Each lease contained a break clause that if the landlords wished to redevelop or demolish the premises six months written notice should be given to the tenant. In 1983 A decided to sell the leases. In 1984 it was found that A had removed seven valuable fireplaces and sold them. It was made clear that A must recover them or the landlord, H. would take action for breach of covenant . It was agreed that if they could not be recovered A would replace them. While surveyors were visiting the premises regarding this matter it was noticed that they were in a condition where redevelopment was possible, however it was not clear whether the break clauses would be invoked. On 2 April H`s surveyor arranged to call on A two days later to discuss the fireplaces. On 3 April A found a buyer for the properties, B. Draft leases were inspected and B had prior knowledge of the break clauses. The sale was not subject to the landlords| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | ABS43573 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 42399-1001 |
CA 17 May 1990. Properties were held by A under three separate leases . Each lease contained a break clause that if the landlords wished to redevelop or demolish the premises six months written notice should be given to the tenant. In 1983 A decided to sell the leases. In 1984 it was found that A had removed seven valuable fireplaces and sold them. It was made clear that A must recover them or the landlord, H. would take action for breach of covenant . It was agreed that if they could not be recovered A would replace them. While surveyors were visiting the premises regarding this matter it was noticed that they were in a condition where redevelopment was possible, however it was not clear whether the break clauses would be invoked. On 2 April H`s surveyor arranged to call on A two days later to discuss the fireplaces. On 3 April A found a buyer for the properties, B. Draft leases were inspected and B had prior knowledge of the break clauses. The sale was not subject to the landlords