Luminar Leisure Ltd v Apostole
Series: Estates Gazette Law Reports ; [2001] 42 EG 140-145(6)Publication details: 2001Subject(s): Summary: ChD 24 May 2001. The claimant (L) held a lease of premises that had been previously operated by the defendant landlord (A) as a nightclub. The premises were subsequently listed as buildings of special interest and L applied to A for consent to underlet and change of use to a fitness centre. Based on the advice and assessment of his valuer (W), A refused consent claiming the change of use and proposed rental value would not compensate him for £300,000 loss of reversionary value. L claimed damages contesting that A had unreasonable withheld consent. A counterclaimed for damages for alleged breaches of covenant by L. L's claim was allowed and A's counterclaim dismissed on the grounds of flawed advice from W. W's method of valuing the business was improper and he had incorrectly dismissed the fitness club as a 'fad' that would not last.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | ABS64695 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 115459-1001 |
ChD 24 May 2001. The claimant (L) held a lease of premises that had been previously operated by the defendant landlord (A) as a nightclub. The premises were subsequently listed as buildings of special interest and L applied to A for consent to underlet and change of use to a fitness centre. Based on the advice and assessment of his valuer (W), A refused consent claiming the change of use and proposed rental value would not compensate him for £300,000 loss of reversionary value. L claimed damages contesting that A had unreasonable withheld consent. A counterclaimed for damages for alleged breaches of covenant by L. L's claim was allowed and A's counterclaim dismissed on the grounds of flawed advice from W. W's method of valuing the business was improper and he had incorrectly dismissed the fitness club as a 'fad' that would not last.