Image from Google Jackets

Barclays Bank plc v Savile Estates Ltd

Series: Estates Gazette Law Reports ; [2002] 24 EG 152-155(4)Publication details: 2002Subject(s): Summary: CA 12 April 2002. The appellant tenant (B) held a lease from the respondent landlord (S) of business premises for a term of 42 years from 1968. The lease provided for rent reviews every seven years. The rent review provisions were to be agreed before the quarter day before the rent review date, and in default of agreement to be assessed by a surveyor appointed by the president of the RICS. The review being argued was for 25 December 1996 and it not had been agreed by 29 September 1996. By 1 September 2000, S was sent a letter on behalf of B which required B to apply to the RICS president for the nomination of an independent expert to determine the rent. The letter stated time was to be of the essence regarding the 28 day time limit. It was initially held that the rent review provisions did not contain a time limit that was capable of being made of the essence. B appealed. "Held" the appeal was allowed.
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number Copy number Status Barcode
Law report London Journal article ABS65637 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) 1 Available 118563-1001

CA 12 April 2002. The appellant tenant (B) held a lease from the respondent landlord (S) of business premises for a term of 42 years from 1968. The lease provided for rent reviews every seven years. The rent review provisions were to be agreed before the quarter day before the rent review date, and in default of agreement to be assessed by a surveyor appointed by the president of the RICS. The review being argued was for 25 December 1996 and it not had been agreed by 29 September 1996. By 1 September 2000, S was sent a letter on behalf of B which required B to apply to the RICS president for the nomination of an independent expert to determine the rent. The letter stated time was to be of the essence regarding the 28 day time limit. It was initially held that the rent review provisions did not contain a time limit that was capable of being made of the essence. B appealed. "Held" the appeal was allowed.