| 000 | 00830cab a2200229 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | WB2542-19 | ||
| 008 | 090401t1989 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d | ||
| 035 | _a(Sirsi) u71275 | ||
| 041 | _aeng | ||
| 245 | _aRight to occupy | ||
| 260 | _c1989 | ||
| 350 | _a0 | ||
| 490 |
_aTimes _v26/10/89 p42 |
||
| 520 | _aIn Meyer v Riddick and Others CA 24 October 1989 it was held that where a landlord whose interest was held on trust , refused to grant a new tenancy on the ground that he intended to occupy the premises himself for business purposes, it was necessary that the occupation arose directly from his interest under the trust. | ||
| 650 | _aBUSINESS TENANCIES | ||
| 650 | _aESTATE AGENTS | ||
| 650 | _aLEASES | ||
| 650 | _aSOLICITORS | ||
| 690 | _aLANDLORD AND TENANT-CASE LAW | ||
| 942 | _n0 | ||
| 948 | _c04/03/1997 | ||
| 999 |
_c44911 _d44911 |
||