000			01306cab a2200193 4500
001			ABS42546
008			090401t1990 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u37537
041			_aeng
245			_aShelley and others v United Artists Corporation Ltd and another
260			_c1990
350			_a0
490			_aEstates Gazette _v(1990) 16 EG 73-82(5)
520			_aCA 20 July 1989. The plaintiffs (S), underlessees of part of a building were not willing to give up possession as the defendants (U) requested so S began proceedings assuming U to be the competent landlord . U claimed S was in error naming them as the competent landlord as they had served a request under Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 s26 on their landlords, specifying a date for commencement of their new tenancy and their existing tenancy would terminate within the minimum reversion time for a competent landlord, making the superior landlord , not U, the competent landlord under s44(1)(b). S was unaware of U`s transactions with the superior landlord and the court held that U would have been estopped from maintaining that S`s claim for a new tenancy was invalid by naming S as the defendant.
650			_aUNDERLEASE
690			_aLANDLORD AND TENANT-CASE LAW-BUSINESS TENANCIES
942			_n0
948			_c04/03/1997
999			_c24236 _d24236