000			01534cab a2200205 4500
001			ABS37526
008			090401t1987 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u5089
041			_aeng
245			_aWolff and Another v Enfield London Borough
260			_c1987
350			_a0
490			_aEstates Gazette _v281 (6326) 21 March 1987, 1320-1321 (2)
520			_aCA 22 January 1987. Appeal by landlords from decision determining the true construction of a rent review clause. By a user clause the premises were not to be used other than for light industrial purposes within Class III of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1972 or any other class/classes within which fell the use or uses permitted by the planning authority from time to time. When the premises were last occupied they were used for this purpose. Shortly before the present lease was granted, planning permission was given for change of use to a non-teaching service unit for Middlesex Polytechnic . At issue was how the clause should be applied to that grant of permission and whether the permitted purpose of a non-teaching service unit is a composite use which does not fall into any use class, or whether the wording was shorthand for listing the various uses which the Polytechnic might make of the premises. Judge decided the latter construction would enable any subsequent
650			_aCONSTRUCTION OF CLAUSE
650			_aPERMITTED USE
690			_aLANDLORD AND TENANT-CASE LAW-RENT REVIEWS
942			_n0
948			_c04/03/1997
999			_c3052 _d3052