Image from Google Jackets

Roadside Group Limited v Zara Commercial Limited

Language: English Publication details: 2010Subject(s): Online resources: Summary: [2010] EWHC 1950 (Ch), 30 July 2010. Appeal considers whether a tenant was liable under its lease for particular activities of its subtenant. Respondent landlord (Z) contended that tenant (R) was as a result of its subtenant (T) in breach of a covenant in its underlease not to use the demised premises "for the parking of motor vehicles for sale on any forecourt" and that Z was thereby entitled to forfeiture of the underlease and possession of the demised premises. Held: R was not in breach of the parking covenant because T was to blame. Found that the phrase in R's contract "not to use" referred to breaches by R not its subtenant T.
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number Copy number Status Barcode
Law report Virtual Online ONLINE PUBLICATION (Browse shelf(Opens below)) 1 Available 151157-2001

[2010] EWHC 1950 (Ch), 30 July 2010. Appeal considers whether a tenant was liable under its lease for particular activities of its subtenant. Respondent landlord (Z) contended that tenant (R) was as a result of its subtenant (T) in breach of a covenant in its underlease not to use the demised premises "for the parking of motor vehicles for sale on any forecourt" and that Z was thereby entitled to forfeiture of the underlease and possession of the demised premises. Held: R was not in breach of the parking covenant because T was to blame. Found that the phrase in R's contract "not to use" referred to breaches by R not its subtenant T.

Previous
Back to results
Next
Close