000			01312cab a2200205 4500
001			ABS39732
008			090401t1988 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u18662
041			_aeng
245			_aHurstfell Ltd v Leicester Square Property Co Ltd
260			_c1988
350			_a0
490			_aEstates Gazette _v(8837) 17 September 1988, 109-110(2)
520			_aCA 16 May 1988. An appeal by the landlord company (L) from a decision in the county court whereby the judge granted a new tenancy to the tenant company (H) despite their continuous delay s in paying rent . In the county court, the judge was satisfied with explanations given by H as to why payments were late, and that there would not be a recurrence in the situation if a new lease was granted. L appealed. L submitted that the judge had erred in his findings, but in the CA the L`s appeal was dismissed; the judge considered it was "eminently a question for decision by the judge as the fact-finding tribunal". It was not possible to say that there was not the evidence on which the judge was entitled to conclude as he did. Appeal dismissed.
650			_aBUSINESS TENANCIES
650			_aLANDLORD AND TENANT ACT 1954 S30 1 B
690			_aLANDLORD AND TENANT-CASE LAW-BUSINESS TENANCIES
942			_n0
948			_c04/03/1997
999			_c12420 _d12420