Image from Google Jackets

Rent review clauses

Series: Estates Gazette ; (0127) 7 July 2001, 130(1)Publication details: 2001Subject(s): Summary: Considers the issue of whether time is of the essence in respect of various provisions within a rent review clause. In the 1977 landmark ruling - "United Scientific Holdings Ltd v Burnley BC" , HL decided that, normally, time is not of the essence. Discusses two recent cases - "McDonald's Property Co Ltd v HSBC Bank" and "Cheapside Land Development Co v Messels Service Co" - which challenged aspects of the "United Scientific" ruling. Concludes that the existence of a detailed timetable is not sufficient to render time of the essence. The 1977 HL ruling must still be regarded as authoritative.
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number Copy number Status Barcode
News article London News article WB3727-22 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) 1 Available 113601-1001

Considers the issue of whether time is of the essence in respect of various provisions within a rent review clause. In the 1977 landmark ruling - "United Scientific Holdings Ltd v Burnley BC" , HL decided that, normally, time is not of the essence. Discusses two recent cases - "McDonald's Property Co Ltd v HSBC Bank" and "Cheapside Land Development Co v Messels Service Co" - which challenged aspects of the "United Scientific" ruling. Concludes that the existence of a detailed timetable is not sufficient to render time of the essence. The 1977 HL ruling must still be regarded as authoritative.