United Dominion Trust Ltd v Shellpoint Trustees
Language: English Series: Estates Gazette ; (1992) 39 EG 144-150(5)Publication details: 1992Subject(s): Summary: ChD 19 June 1992. In August 1987 N was assigned the lease of a flat, of which the defendant`s (S) predecessor in title, X, was the holder, for a substantial premium of which £61,000 was advanced by the plaintiff U. U was granted a charge over the lease. The lease contained a provision for payment of service charges and for forfeiture for non-payment of rent and service charges. X issued proceedings for arrears of service charges and possession of the flat against N. U was identified in the particulars of the claim as a person `who is entitled to claim relief against forfeiture` and was given notice of the proceedings. Judgement was against N and it was ordered that unless the service charge arrears and costs were paid that N should give up possession of the flat. The arrears were paid but the costs were not. X took possession of the flat in February 1990. Since then X and later S, on transfer of the reversion of the lease, have been in possession. In February 1991 U issued proceeding| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | ABS47272 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 61333-1001 |
ChD 19 June 1992. In August 1987 N was assigned the lease of a flat, of which the defendant`s (S) predecessor in title, X, was the holder, for a substantial premium of which £61,000 was advanced by the plaintiff U. U was granted a charge over the lease. The lease contained a provision for payment of service charges and for forfeiture for non-payment of rent and service charges. X issued proceedings for arrears of service charges and possession of the flat against N. U was identified in the particulars of the claim as a person `who is entitled to claim relief against forfeiture` and was given notice of the proceedings. Judgement was against N and it was ordered that unless the service charge arrears and costs were paid that N should give up possession of the flat. The arrears were paid but the costs were not. X took possession of the flat in February 1990. Since then X and later S, on transfer of the reversion of the lease, have been in possession. In February 1991 U issued proceeding