Bankway Properties Ltd v Penfold-Dunsford and another
Series: Estates Gazette ; [2001] 26 EG 164-173(10)Publication details: 2001Subject(s): Summary: CA 10 April 2001. In February 1994 the defendant tenants (P) were granted an assured tenancy as expressed in written agreement, which contained clause 8(b)(iii) stating rent to be £25,000 from February 1996. When P fell into arrears, the claimant landlord (B) issued proceedings for possession, which was granted. P appealed claiming clause 8(b)(iii) was not a valid provision to increase the rent, but was incorporated to enable the B to gain possession under the Housing Act 1988. "Held": The appeal was allowed on the grounds that the review clause was an unlawful contracting out of the Act and therefore had to be ignored.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | ABS64170 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 113619-1001 |
CA 10 April 2001. In February 1994 the defendant tenants (P) were granted an assured tenancy as expressed in written agreement, which contained clause 8(b)(iii) stating rent to be £25,000 from February 1996. When P fell into arrears, the claimant landlord (B) issued proceedings for possession, which was granted. P appealed claiming clause 8(b)(iii) was not a valid provision to increase the rent, but was incorporated to enable the B to gain possession under the Housing Act 1988. "Held": The appeal was allowed on the grounds that the review clause was an unlawful contracting out of the Act and therefore had to be ignored.