Taylor v Courage Ltd
Language: English Series: Estates Gazette ; (1993 44 EG 116-124(6)Publication details: (1993 44 EG 116-124(6)Subject(s): Summary: CA 19 June 1993. Having extended the pub to include a new kitchen and dining the publican T, applied for an extension of his lease under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 pt II. This was refused at the county court on the grounds that his was not a protected tenancy by virtue of the exception made by s43(1)(d)(i): the premises were not a restaurant. T argued on appeal that he engaged in restaurant business on the site and therefore the tenancy fell within the proviso to s43(1)(d)(i) and was protected. The court agreed and allowed the appeal. Although the pub was not a restaurant, the Act did not so require: restaurant facilities were provided on the site.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | ABS49828 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 72895-1001 |
CA 19 June 1993. Having extended the pub to include a new kitchen and dining the publican T, applied for an extension of his lease under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 pt II. This was refused at the county court on the grounds that his was not a protected tenancy by virtue of the exception made by s43(1)(d)(i): the premises were not a restaurant. T argued on appeal that he engaged in restaurant business on the site and therefore the tenancy fell within the proviso to s43(1)(d)(i) and was protected. The court agreed and allowed the appeal. Although the pub was not a restaurant, the Act did not so require: restaurant facilities were provided on the site.