A case of warts and all
Series: Estates Gazette ; (0217) 27 April 2002, 153(1)Publication details: 2002Subject(s): Summary: Looks at the deficient provisions within the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 governing the termination of a fixed-term business tenancy by a tenant. While some of the issues were resolved by "Esselte AB v Pearl Assurance Ltd"[1997], the recent case "Single Horse Properties Ltd v Surrey County Council"[2002] has extended the benefits of "Esselte" at the expense of landlords; a tenant can terminate a business tenancy by quitting before the contractual term date, even when there is an ongoing application for a new tenancy.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| News article | London News article | WB3816-18 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 117729-1001 |
Looks at the deficient provisions within the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 governing the termination of a fixed-term business tenancy by a tenant. While some of the issues were resolved by "Esselte AB v Pearl Assurance Ltd"[1997], the recent case "Single Horse Properties Ltd v Surrey County Council"[2002] has extended the benefits of "Esselte" at the expense of landlords; a tenant can terminate a business tenancy by quitting before the contractual term date, even when there is an ongoing application for a new tenancy.