000			01670cab a2200229 4500
001			ABS46612
008			090401t1992 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u58865
041			_aeng
245			_aPontsarn Investments Ltd v Kansallis-Osake-Pankki
260			_c1992
350			_a0
490			_aEstates Gazette _v(1992) 22 EG 103-110(5)
520			_aChD 19 March 1992. By a lease dated October 1985 the plaintiff, as landlord, demised the premises to the defendant, as tenant, for a period of 25 years. The dispute relates to that part of the building used as offices. The initial rent was £1,242,000pa with five yearly rent reviews. This dispute arose at the first rent review. The parties agreed on a surveyor to act as arbitrator. Both parties made submissions to the arbitrator. The landlord claimed an increase of 10% based on comparables. The tenants however claimed that `vacant but fit for immediate occupation and use` merely means that you disregard any period of time necessary to fit out the premises. The enforcement notices were served on M and no further demolition work took the arbitrators decision was binding. After a detailed consideration of the case law relating to binding arbitration it was held that it was binding as no error of judgement had been made. The arbitrator was right to hold that `fit for occupation and use` m
650			_aMANAGEMENT-DISPUTE AVOIDANCE, MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-DISPUTE MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-ARBITRATION
650			_aFIT FOR OCCUPATION
650			_aFITTED OUT
650			_aRENT REVIEWS
690			_aLANDLORD AND TENANT-CASE LAW-RENT REVIEWS
942			_n0
948			_c04/03/1997
999			_c36000 _d36000