CIN Properties Ltd v Gill
Language: English Series: Estates Gazette ; (1993) 38 EG 152-154(3)Publication details: 1993Subject(s): Summary: QBD 7 December 1992, The plaintiff landlords, C, let a flat in a building they owned to the defendant, G, for a period of 28 years. The lease contained a covenant not to assign without the landlords consent which would not be unreasonably withheld. In February 1989 G put the lease up for sale at auction and it was acquired by another company, A. They then applied to C for their consent but this was refused. By early 1989 the rent was in arrears and C issued three writs. In the first two of these actions G counterclaimed under Landlord and Tenant Act 1988 for damages for breach of the landlords duty not to withhold consent to assignment. Before the third hearing C applied to have A wound up and to present its accounts in court. This was not allowed. C appealed and this was dismissed on the grounds that a landlord cannot rely on matters which did not influence him when he refused consent therefore later accounts were not relevant.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | ABS49520 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 71682-1001 |
QBD 7 December 1992, The plaintiff landlords, C, let a flat in a building they owned to the defendant, G, for a period of 28 years. The lease contained a covenant not to assign without the landlords consent which would not be unreasonably withheld. In February 1989 G put the lease up for sale at auction and it was acquired by another company, A. They then applied to C for their consent but this was refused. By early 1989 the rent was in arrears and C issued three writs. In the first two of these actions G counterclaimed under Landlord and Tenant Act 1988 for damages for breach of the landlords duty not to withhold consent to assignment. Before the third hearing C applied to have A wound up and to present its accounts in court. This was not allowed. C appealed and this was dismissed on the grounds that a landlord cannot rely on matters which did not influence him when he refused consent therefore later accounts were not relevant.