| 000 | 01002cab a2200265 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | WB2719-55 | ||
| 008 | 090401t1991 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d | ||
| 035 | _a(Sirsi) u74245 | ||
| 041 | _aeng | ||
| 245 | _aLocality | ||
| 260 | _c1991 | ||
| 350 | _a0 | ||
| 490 |
_aEGCS _v1991 53 (11/5/91) |
||
| 490 |
_aEstates Times _vno 1095 10/5/91 p2(2) |
||
| 520 | _aIn Shearson Lehman Brothers Ltd and others v Humphrys (VO) and another, LT 25 April 1991, it was held that `locality` in rating valuations can mean a large area so assessments of comparable modern offices in the City and Islington were admissible and relevant, It should not be assumed that the premises existed in a 1973 setting. (Transcript available on loan from the LIS) | ||
| 650 | _aBROADGATE | ||
| 650 | _aCLEMENT V ADDIS LTD | ||
| 650 | _aCOMPARABLES | ||
| 650 | _aRATING APPEALS | ||
| 650 | _aREVALUATION | ||
| 650 | _aTONE OF THE LIST | ||
| 690 | _aRATING AND VALUATION-CASE LAW | ||
| 942 | _n0 | ||
| 948 | _c04/03/1997 | ||
| 999 |
_c46867 _d46867 |
||