| 000 | 00861cab a2200217 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | ABS46600 | ||
| 008 | 090401t1992 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d | ||
| 035 | _a(Sirsi) u58829 | ||
| 041 | _aeng | ||
| 245 | _aFit for use and occupation | ||
| 260 | _c1992 | ||
| 350 | _a0 | ||
| 490 |
_aEstates Gazette _v(9222) 6 June 1992, 117(1) |
||
| 520 | _aDiscusses the recent case "Pontsarn Investments Ltd v Kansallis-Osake-Pankki (Abs*****) which concerned the question of whether premises were `fit for immediate occupation and use` and the effects of this on rent review. Compares it to the cases "Jones v Sherwood Computer Services Ltd" and "Nikko Hotels (UK) Ltd v MEPC plc" (Abs44864). | ||
| 650 | _aFIT FOR OCCUPATION | ||
| 650 | _aFITTED OUT | ||
| 650 | _aRENT REVIEWS | ||
| 690 | _aLANDLORD AND TENANT-RENT REVIEWS | ||
| 942 | _n0 | ||
| 948 | _c04/03/1997 | ||
| 999 |
_c35973 _d35973 |
||