Bickenhall Engineering Co Ltd v Grandmet Restaurants Ltd
Language: English Series: Estates Gazette ; (1995) 10 EG 123-129(7)Publication details: 1995Subject(s): Summary: CA 29 July 1995. G, the appellant, held premises on a lease from B, where the rent review clause provided for a market rent to be set by the landlord, provided no counternotice was received from the tenant in the five weeks following service of the review notice. This in fact happened, with G`s counternotice being issued after the specified five weeks. B was granted arrears of rent and G appealed claiming that time was not of the essence. Appeal allowed.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | ABS52551 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 84316-1001 |
CA 29 July 1995. G, the appellant, held premises on a lease from B, where the rent review clause provided for a market rent to be set by the landlord, provided no counternotice was received from the tenant in the five weeks following service of the review notice. This in fact happened, with G`s counternotice being issued after the specified five weeks. B was granted arrears of rent and G appealed claiming that time was not of the essence. Appeal allowed.