Image from Google Jackets

Ben Cleuch Estates Ltd v Scottish Enterprise [electronic resource]

Language: English Publication details: 2008Subject(s): Online resources: Summary: [2008] CSIH 1 CA38/05 4 January 2008. Appeal against a decision made on 1 March 2006 in favour of B (see L133211). Considered whether a break notice had been validly served by S on a property acquired on 14 October 2002. S had the benefit of a break option to terminate the lease 10 years early and sought to exercise that option, serving a formal notice of this intention. However, the notice was served on an associated company, Bonnytoun Estates Ltd. B contented that the notice was invalid and consequently raised court proceedings for the lease to continue until 2016. S argued that because B was a subsidiary of Bonnytoun Estates Ltd, the companies had the same registered office and company director, that was all that was required. As a secondary argument, S presented evidence of invoices issued by the B's agent that indicated that B was acting on behalf of Bonnytoun Estates Ltd. "Held": Court rejected the previous decision and ruled in favour of S. S justifiably believed that Bonnytoun was the landlord and were entitled to think that the break notice should be addresed to Bonnytoun.
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number Copy number Status Barcode
Law report Virtual Online ONLINE PUBLICATION (Browse shelf(Opens below)) 1 Available 145736-2001

[2008] CSIH 1 CA38/05 4 January 2008. Appeal against a decision made on 1 March 2006 in favour of B (see L133211). Considered whether a break notice had been validly served by S on a property acquired on 14 October 2002. S had the benefit of a break option to terminate the lease 10 years early and sought to exercise that option, serving a formal notice of this intention. However, the notice was served on an associated company, Bonnytoun Estates Ltd. B contented that the notice was invalid and consequently raised court proceedings for the lease to continue until 2016. S argued that because B was a subsidiary of Bonnytoun Estates Ltd, the companies had the same registered office and company director, that was all that was required. As a secondary argument, S presented evidence of invoices issued by the B's agent that indicated that B was acting on behalf of Bonnytoun Estates Ltd. "Held": Court rejected the previous decision and ruled in favour of S. S justifiably believed that Bonnytoun was the landlord and were entitled to think that the break notice should be addresed to Bonnytoun.