000			01576cab a2200229 4500
001			ABS46853
008			090401t1992 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u59751
041			_aeng
245			_aPatel and Others v Peel Investments (South) Ltd
260			_c1992
350			_a0
490			_aEstates Gazette _v1992 30 EG 88-95(7)
520			_aChD 3 July 1992. Two applications by originating summons, firstly by the plaintiff landlord (X) for a declaration as to the rent payable under a lease of shop premises and secondly by the defendant tenants (Y) in pursuant to s27 of the Arbitration Act 1950 to extend the time for commencement of arbitration proceedings concerning the proper rental valuation. In the first case, in accordance with the rent review provisions in the lease, the landlords served a notice on 7 July 1988 specifying a annual rent of £19.500. The rent review clause provided that tenants could serve a counternotice within three months as to which time was of essence. On 15 August 1989, the landlord served a second rent review notice specifying £23,000. On 12 February 1990, Y decided to appoint an arbitrator. X contended that in the absence of a counternotice before 7 October 1988, the rent was £19.500 whilst Y argued that X had waived their right to rely on time constraints. Held that X was entitled to a declara
650			_aARBITRATION ACT 1950 S27
650			_aEXTENSION OF TIME
650			_aRENT REVIEWS
650			_aTIME OF THE ESSENCE
690			_aARBITRATION-CASE LAW
942			_n0
948			_c04/03/1997
999			_c36719 _d36719