000			01504cab a2200193 4500
001			ABS39856
008			090401t1988 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u19470
041			_aeng
245			_aRawashdeh v Lane and another
260			_c1988
350			_a0
490			_aEstates Gazette _v(8840) 8 October 1988, 109-112(3)
520			_aCA 19 April 1988. Appeal by landlords (L) from decision by CA registrar, granting the tenant (R) leave to appeal out of time from a cc decision dismissing his application for a new tenancy of premises occupied as a launderette . L had opposed a new tenancy because of R`s persistent delays in paying rent. R was late in putting in his appeal against the cc decision, wrongly assuming that the three-month continuation of his tenancy under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 was the period during which he could appeal. The appeal period was in fact four weeks, expiring on 30 November 1987. R`s solicitors did not apply for an extension out of time until 12 January 1988. Despite "the weakness of the appeal" the registrar decided to give leave. L appealed against that decision. The matters which the registrar was required to take into consideration are set out in the decision in C M Van Stillevoldt BV v E L Carriers Inc (1983), namely: the length and reasons for the delay, the arguability of th
650			_aLANDLORD AND TENANT ACT 1954 S30
690			_aLANDLORD AND TENANT-CASE LAW-BUSINESS TENANCIES
942			_n0
948			_c04/03/1997
999			_c13001 _d13001