000			01462cab a22002175a 4500
001			L137264
008			070327s2007 xxk f v 000 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u137264
041	0		_aeng
100	1		_aQuigley, Ian
245	0	0	_aOn the wrong track?
260			_c2007
490		0	_aJournal of the Law Society of Scotland _v52(2) February 2007, 48-50(3)
520			_aSuggests that the reliance of Scottish case law on precedent has meant that it has not always kept pace with commercial practice, particularly in the context of leases. and that property law custom and practice should also be taken into account. Illustrates this viewpoint by reference to two cases. In ?Bisset v Aberdeen Magistrates? ([1898] IF 87) a lease for 999 years contained a provision whereby the grantor bound himself to deliver to the lessee and his executors and successors at any time upon request a feu charter of the subject let on the conditions contained in the lease. ?Optical Express (Gyle) Ltd v Marks and Spencer plc? ([2000] SLT 644) concerned a back letter with an exclusivity clause and whether successors to the landlord who granted that back letter could be taken bound to the terms thereof.
590			_aKA
650	2	4	_aBISSET V ABERDEEN MAGISTRATES
650	2	4	_aOPTICAL EXPRESS (GYLE) LTD V MARKS AND SPENCER PLC
651		4	_aScotland _y1999-
690			_aPROPERTY-COMMERCIAL PROPERTY-COMMERCIAL LANDLORD AND TENANT-COMMERCIAL LEASES
942			_n0
999			_c78572 _d78572