First Leisure Trading Ltd v Dorita Properties Ltd
Language: English Series: Estates Gazette ; (1991) 23 EG 116-126(6)Publication details: 1991Subject(s): Summary: ChD 15 November 1990. The plaintiffs F held a long lease on a public house and an adjoining property (the extension). The rent of the extension came up for review in December 1989 and was to be an open market rent . The lease contained a provision that the premises were only to be used as a extension to the pub. There was a disagreement over the rent and an arbitrator was called in. Problems arose as to whether F was a hypothetical tenant and whether those tenants bidding on the open market are restricted to those persons willing to take the risk of seeking and obtaining the permission of the pubs owner to use those premises as an extension. It was held that the arbitrator should not use F as a hypothetical tenant and that the bidding for the tenancy should not be restricted.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | ABS44696 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 48577-1001 |
ChD 15 November 1990. The plaintiffs F held a long lease on a public house and an adjoining property (the extension). The rent of the extension came up for review in December 1989 and was to be an open market rent . The lease contained a provision that the premises were only to be used as a extension to the pub. There was a disagreement over the rent and an arbitrator was called in. Problems arose as to whether F was a hypothetical tenant and whether those tenants bidding on the open market are restricted to those persons willing to take the risk of seeking and obtaining the permission of the pubs owner to use those premises as an extension. It was held that the arbitrator should not use F as a hypothetical tenant and that the bidding for the tenancy should not be restricted.