Woolwich Property Services Ltd v Capital Land Holdings Ltd
Language: English Series: Property and Compensation Reports ; 1993 66 PCR 378-392(8)Publication details: 1993Subject(s): Summary: ChD 16 November 1992. A lease contained detailed rent review proposals under which W as landlord served a notice to increase the rent. C had a month to serve a counternotice seeking an independent experts opinion. A letter was issued but not replied to so a second was issued after the month. W claimed that the first notice had not been valid. Held that the notice was valid as it responded to W`s trigger notice and was sent by recorded delivery with a request to acknowledge. Altough it did not mention that they wished the dispute to be referred to an independent expert the lease should have been consulted to determine the course of action.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | ABS49993 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 73565-1001 |
ChD 16 November 1992. A lease contained detailed rent review proposals under which W as landlord served a notice to increase the rent. C had a month to serve a counternotice seeking an independent experts opinion. A letter was issued but not replied to so a second was issued after the month. W claimed that the first notice had not been valid. Held that the notice was valid as it responded to W`s trigger notice and was sent by recorded delivery with a request to acknowledge. Altough it did not mention that they wished the dispute to be referred to an independent expert the lease should have been consulted to determine the course of action.