| 000 | 01073cab a2200193 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | ABS44118 | ||
| 008 | 090401t xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d | ||
| 035 | _a(Sirsi) u45420 | ||
| 041 | _aeng | ||
| 100 | _aWhipple, R.T.M. | ||
| 245 | _aValuations for commercial rent review purposes, procedural guidelines and other commentary | ||
| 260 | _c9(2) Winter 1990/91, 159-174(9) | ||
| 350 | _a0 | ||
| 490 |
_aJournal of Property Valuation and Investment _v9(2) Winter 1990/91, 159-174(9) |
||
| 520 | _aProcedures for carrying out valuation s for rent review purposes are re-cast in a contemporary approach with special attention paid to market structure , data compatibility and the effect of market distortions. A detailed analysis is presented of relevant aspects of the Australian case Broken Hill Pty Co Ltd v Australian Mutual Society which discloses illogicalites in valuation theory and practice in the tradition of the English case Segama NV v Penny Le Roy Ltd . (Journal abstract) | ||
| 690 | _aLANDLORD AND TENANT-RENT REVIEWS | ||
| 942 | _n0 | ||
| 948 | _c04/03/1997 | ||
| 999 |
_c28823 _d28823 |
||