Image from Google Jackets

South v Chamberlayne and others

Series: Estates Gazette Law Reports ; [2001] 43 EG 190-194(5)Publication details: 2001Subject(s): Summary: ChD 7 September 2001. The claimant tenant (S) served a notice upon the respondent landlords to enfranchise under the Leasehold Reform Act 1967. The LT determined the price payable as £2.395m. S contracted to subsell her interest in the property to E for £4.5m and asked the landlords to transfer directly to E. Shortly after S assigned her statutory rights under the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 to E. The landlords decided they were not obliged to transfer the property to S or E because according to the provisions of the assignment, S's statutory right had been extinguished as the right had not been assigned with the tenancy. S issued proceedings claiming specific performance of the landlord's statutory obligation to transfer the property. It was found that S was entitled to specific performance.
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number Copy number Status Barcode
Law report London Journal article ABS64696 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) 1 Available 115461-1001

ChD 7 September 2001. The claimant tenant (S) served a notice upon the respondent landlords to enfranchise under the Leasehold Reform Act 1967. The LT determined the price payable as £2.395m. S contracted to subsell her interest in the property to E for £4.5m and asked the landlords to transfer directly to E. Shortly after S assigned her statutory rights under the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 to E. The landlords decided they were not obliged to transfer the property to S or E because according to the provisions of the assignment, S's statutory right had been extinguished as the right had not been assigned with the tenancy. S issued proceedings claiming specific performance of the landlord's statutory obligation to transfer the property. It was found that S was entitled to specific performance.