Meadfield Properties Ltd v SoS Environment
Language: English Series: Estates Gazette ; (1995) 03 EG 128-130(3)Publication details: 1995Subject(s): Summary: ChD 21 July 1994. By a lease dated February 1985 the tenant (S) held a term from 24 June 1985 until 24 December 2003. The lease made provision for a tenant`s option to break at the end of ten years. In December 1993 S gave notice to terminate the lease on 23 June 1994. The landlord (M) contended that the notice was invalid as, when the term was defined from a certain date, it commences on the following day, so, the first ten years should have expired on 24 June 1994. M`s summons was dismissed on the grounds that the rule that where a term is expressed to commence from a specified date, that date is not included in the term which therefore commences on the following day, may be rebutted by indications in the lease that the specified day was intended to be included in the term.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | ABS52144 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 63320-1001 |
ChD 21 July 1994. By a lease dated February 1985 the tenant (S) held a term from 24 June 1985 until 24 December 2003. The lease made provision for a tenant`s option to break at the end of ten years. In December 1993 S gave notice to terminate the lease on 23 June 1994. The landlord (M) contended that the notice was invalid as, when the term was defined from a certain date, it commences on the following day, so, the first ten years should have expired on 24 June 1994. M`s summons was dismissed on the grounds that the rule that where a term is expressed to commence from a specified date, that date is not included in the term which therefore commences on the following day, may be rebutted by indications in the lease that the specified day was intended to be included in the term.