Eller v Grovecrest Investments Ltd
Language: English Series: Estates Gazette ; (9427) EG 9 July 1994, 139-142(4)Publication details: 1994Subject(s): Summary: CA 15 February 1994. An appeal by the tenant (E) against a decision discharging an injunction to restrain a distress being levied by the respondent landlord (G). The question of the appeal was whether set-off against a claim for rent can be invoked against a landlord exercising the common law remedy of distress. Held, allowing the appeal. With reference to the position at common law and the court of equity, the judge was of the opinion that the present case should be decided in accordance with principle rather than following cases based upon procedural distinctions of long ago. In applying the principle that a landlord should not recover by distress what he could not recover by an action, the court is now free to hold that equitable set-off is available against a claim to levy a distress.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | ABS51108 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 10554-1001 |
CA 15 February 1994. An appeal by the tenant (E) against a decision discharging an injunction to restrain a distress being levied by the respondent landlord (G). The question of the appeal was whether set-off against a claim for rent can be invoked against a landlord exercising the common law remedy of distress. Held, allowing the appeal. With reference to the position at common law and the court of equity, the judge was of the opinion that the present case should be decided in accordance with principle rather than following cases based upon procedural distinctions of long ago. In applying the principle that a landlord should not recover by distress what he could not recover by an action, the court is now free to hold that equitable set-off is available against a claim to levy a distress.