000			01634cab a2200229 4500
001			ABS45935
008			090401t1992 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u55971
041			_aeng
245			_aPrudential Assurance Co Ltd v London Residuary Body and others
260			_c1992
350			_a0
490			_aEstates Gazette _v(1992) 06 EG 145-152(5)
520			_aCA 1 November 1991. Prior to the agreement in question N owned land which he wished to develop. The highway authority contemplated widening the road and accordingly on 19 December 1930 acquired part of N`s land consisting of the frontage. On 30 December they leased it back to N together with a right to put up a temporary building which he could occupy until the authority needed the land. The new permanent building he wished to erect would have its frontage on the widened road. This was therefore a sale and leaseback agreement. The interest in the land became vested in the plaintiff and in 1975 they sublet the premises to LEB. The defendants were the successors to the original highway authority but were not themselves responsible for highways. However it was held that they could deal with reversion on the footing that the interest created by the memorandum of agreement was terminable. Prior to selling the land the authority served a notice under Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 s25 determ
650			_aLANDLORD AND TENANT ACT 1954 S25
650			_aNOTICE TO QUIT
650			_aROAD WIDENING
650			_aSALE AND LEASEBACK AGREEMENT
690			_aLANDLORD AND TENANT-CASE LAW-BUSINESS TENANCIES
942			_n0
948			_c04/03/1997
999			_c34191 _d34191