Image from Google Jackets

Lee v Heaton and Another

Language: English Series: Estates Gazette ; 283(6350) 5 September 1987, 1076-1077(2)Publication details: 1987Subject(s): Summary: Appeal by the tenant(T) from an award made by the arbitrator, under the Milk (Community Outgoers Scheme ) (England and Wales) Regulations 1986, who had rejected a claim for compensation for discontinuance of milk production. In the tenancy agreement T had covenanted "not to dispose of the whole or any part of any basic quota under a marketing scheme...", and the landlords withheld their consent to allow T to discontinue production. The arbitrator upheld the landlords` refusal as not unreasonable under the regulations due to the existence of the covenant. The point was not taken before the arbitrator that the covenant did not apply to milk quota . The tenant appealed to the tribunal, submitting that the milk quota which was the subject of the present regulations and which implemented part of the CAP of the EEC , was not "basic quota under a marketing scheme" pursuant to the UK Agricultural Marketing Acts. The tribunal held that the provisions giving effect to the EEC Council and Commi
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number Copy number Status Barcode
Law report London Journal article ABS38168 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) 1 Available 8987-1001

Appeal by the tenant(T) from an award made by the arbitrator, under the Milk (Community Outgoers Scheme ) (England and Wales) Regulations 1986, who had rejected a claim for compensation for discontinuance of milk production. In the tenancy agreement T had covenanted "not to dispose of the whole or any part of any basic quota under a marketing scheme...", and the landlords withheld their consent to allow T to discontinue production. The arbitrator upheld the landlords` refusal as not unreasonable under the regulations due to the existence of the covenant. The point was not taken before the arbitrator that the covenant did not apply to milk quota . The tenant appealed to the tribunal, submitting that the milk quota which was the subject of the present regulations and which implemented part of the CAP of the EEC , was not "basic quota under a marketing scheme" pursuant to the UK Agricultural Marketing Acts. The tribunal held that the provisions giving effect to the EEC Council and Commi