000			01843cam a2200229 4500
001			ABS64812
008			011204n2001 000 0 eng u
035			_a(Sirsi) u115855
245			_aBircham & Co Nominees (No 2) Ltd and another v Worrell Holdings Ltd
260			_c2001
490			_aEstates Gazette Law Reports _v[2001] 47 EG 149, 149-158(10)
520			_aCA 22 May 2001. The appellants (B) were the owners of the reversion to a long lease held by the respondent tenant (W). Clause 5 of the lease stated that during the lease, that if the tenant wanted to assign the lease, it should be first offered to the landlord, including the price at which it would sell. If there was no response from the landlord within 21 days, the assignment could then proceed to an approved assignee at an ecquivalent, or higher price than offered to the landlord. On 28 October 1997, following an offer to purchase in the open market value at £1.7m W offered to sell the term to the landlord for the same price. On 18 November 1997 B stated they wished to exercise that right and that carpets and other matters should be included in the sale. By January 1998 W was arguing that there was no binding contract between the parties because, "inter alia", the two letters of 28 October and 18 November did not fulfil the Law of Property(Miscellaneous Provisions) 1989 s2. The Vice Chancellor concluded that the two letters did not satisfy s2 of the 1989 Act. B's appeal dismissed.
590			_aABS
650			_aPRE-EMPTION RIGHTS
650			_aENFORCEMENT
650			_aOPTION
650			_aLAW OF PROPERTY (MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS) ACT 1989 S2
650			_aCONDITIONAL CONTRACT
650			_aBIRCHAM AND CO NOMINEES (NO 2) LTD AND ANOTHER V WORRELL HOLDINGS LTD
690			_aLANDLORD AND TENANT-BUSINESS TENANCIES-CASE LAW
942			_n0
999			_c69020 _d69020