000			01519cab a2200193 4500
001			##L133570
008			060519n2005 000 0 eng u
035			_a(Sirsi) u133570
041	0		_aeng
245	0	0	_aCollette Celine Littman and another v Aspen Oil (Broking) Limited
260			_c2005
520			_a[2005] EWCA Civ 1579, 19 December 2005. Appeal from a determination of a preliminary issue in ([2005] EWHC 1369 (Ch), [2005] NPC 88) where a break clause in the lease was worded incorrectly. The lease was amended since it was obvious what the mistake was, and was easily remedied as a matter of construction. On appeal, the tenant submitted that an alternative reasonable drafting error could be hypothesised, so the clause was void for uncertainty. "Held": Appeal dismissed. The four conditions for the rectification of a unilateral mistake were made out, and it did not matter that the result put the parties in a contractual position they had not agreed. The tenant's attempt to take advantage of an obvious drafting error was inequitable.
590			_aIKA230506
650	2	4	_aLITTMAN AND ANOTHER V ASPEN OIL (BROKING) LTD
650	2	4	_aTHOMAS BATES AND SON LTD V WYNDHAM'S (LINGERIE) LTD
690			_aPROPERTY-COMMERCIAL PROPERTY-LEASEHOLD COMMERCIAL PROPERTY-COMMERCIAL LANDLORD AND TENANT-BUSINESS TENANCIES-BREACHING BUSINESS TENANCIES
856	4	0	_uhttps://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2005/1579.html _zView the item free of charge at www.bailii.org...
942			_n0
999			_c77087 _d77087