Boots the Chemists Ltd v Pinkland Ltd ; Thorn EMI plc v same
Language: English Series: Estates Gazette ; (1992) 28 EG 118-120(3)Publication details: 1992Subject(s): Summary: County Court 13 April 1992. The defendants, P, owned the Elephant and Castle Shopping Centre and the plaintiff, B and T, occupied two units. T occupied unit 303 under a 21-year lease dated 3 April 1964. B occupied 2 units one under a ground lease granted in February 1965 for 21 years amended by a deed of variation. In August 1983 various questions needed to be resolved following applications for new tenancies under Landlord and Tenant Act 1954. The questions being for B re a positive trading covenant, whether the rent review was upwards/downwards or only upwards and the hypothetical term at rent reviews; for T the length of term and for both of them the management fees. Dispute arose as to whether T wished a three or ten year extension of the lease which changed T`s attitude towards T`s disputes. B sought to resist a positive trading covenant in their lease as only one of their previous leases contained one and now the two leases had been combined. It was held that this covenant shou| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | ABS46771 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 59453-1001 |
County Court 13 April 1992. The defendants, P, owned the Elephant and Castle Shopping Centre and the plaintiff, B and T, occupied two units. T occupied unit 303 under a 21-year lease dated 3 April 1964. B occupied 2 units one under a ground lease granted in February 1965 for 21 years amended by a deed of variation. In August 1983 various questions needed to be resolved following applications for new tenancies under Landlord and Tenant Act 1954. The questions being for B re a positive trading covenant, whether the rent review was upwards/downwards or only upwards and the hypothetical term at rent reviews; for T the length of term and for both of them the management fees. Dispute arose as to whether T wished a three or ten year extension of the lease which changed T`s attitude towards T`s disputes. B sought to resist a positive trading covenant in their lease as only one of their previous leases contained one and now the two leases had been combined. It was held that this covenant shou