000			01476cab a2200181 4500
001			ABS40812
008			090401t1989 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u26126
041			_aeng
245			_aR & A Millett (Shops) Ltd v Leon Allan International Fashions Ltd
260			_c1989
350			_a0
490			_aEstates Gazette _v(1989) 18 EG 107-111(3)
520			_aCA 19 December 1988. Appeal by underlessees (L) from previous decision in favour of underlessors (M) concerning the construction of clause in a rent review . A formula contained in the review clause in the underlease referred to the rent in the headlease; it contained no reference to a fair market rent. The dispute arose because the original headlease had been surrendered and a new headlease granted; this lease was expressly stated to be subject to, and with the benefit of, the underlease. The relevant clause in the original headlease indicated that the object was to reach a fair market rack rent of the premises. At issue was whether M was still entitled to a rent review in accordance with the clause in the underlease as they submitted, or whether the review clause ceased to be operative as L contended. CA followed Sudbrook Trading Estate Ltd v Eggleton (1983), where it was held that the rent review clause in the underlease was not void for uncertainty; the judge ordered an inquiry a
690			_aLANDLORD AND TENANT-CASE LAW-RENT REVIEWS
942			_n0
948			_c04/03/1997
999			_c17533 _d17533