000			01636cab a2200241 4500
001			ABS58190
008			090401t1998 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u83256
041			_aeng
245			_aFox & Widley v Guram and another
260			_c1998
350			_a0
490			_aEstates Gazette _v(9803) 17 January 1998, 142-146(5)
520			_aQBD 3 October 1997. The applicant tenants held a lease on a lock-up shop and premises at a rent subject to rent review. The rent review clause provided that the rent at review should be such sum as should be specified in a notice served by the landlords to which the tenants were entitled to serve a counternotice within three months requiring the rent to be determined as the `open market rental` at arbitration. The landlord`s surveyor gave notice requiring the rent to be raised. The tenants failed to serve a counternotice. The tenants sought a declaration that the letter did not amount to notice within the meaning of the rent review clause because the Landlord`s surveyors had no authority to give the notice and the rent referred to was not the result of any determination of open market rental value. Also an extension of time under the Arbitration Act 1996 s12 was sought for serving the counternotice in order to bring the arbitration proceedings into being. Application dismissed
650			_aARBITRATION ACT 1996 S12
650			_aCOUNTER NOTICE
650			_aEXTENSION OF TIME
650			_aOPEN MARKET RENTAL VALUE
650			_aRENT REVIEW CLAUSE
690			_aLANDLORD AND TENANT-CASE LAW-RENT REVIEWS
942			_n0
948			_c22/01/1998
999			_c52574 _d52574