000			01567cab a2200217 4500
001			ABS42378
008			090401t1989 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u36447
041			_aeng
245			_aApus Properties Ltd v Douglas Farrow and Co Ltd and others
260			_c1989
350			_a0
490			_aEstates Gazette Law Reports _v(1989) 2 EGLR 265-272(8)
520			_aQBD 18 April 1989. The landlords (A) were suing the original tenant (D) and the sureties of the assignees of the lease for rent arrears arising as a result of the determination of the rent review by a independent surveyor (B). The rent review clause hypothesized a letting "on the same terms ... no account being taken of any improvements carried out by the tenant". The lease restricted use of the building to offices in connection with the business of property management and dealers and ancillary legal offices. The issue was whether B was in error regarding the rent review on the grounds that he failed to disregard improvements and valued on the basis that the hypothetical lease contained the user covenant . B produced a speaking award which stated that he had assumed that the user clause had been varied in accordance with the deed so as to be used as offices for other professionals and that the basement had been valued as offices. If the review was incorrect then there was the questio
650			_aDISREGARDS
650			_aNEGLIGENCE
650			_aRESTRICTED USE
690			_aLANDLORD AND TENANT-CASE LAW-RENT REVIEWS
942			_n0
948			_c04/03/1997
999			_c23665 _d23665