| 000 | 01129cab a22002055a 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | L138816 | ||
| 008 | 070712e20070707xxk f 000 0 eng d | ||
| 035 | _a(Sirsi) u138816 | ||
| 041 | 0 | _aeng | |
| 100 | 1 | _aDensham, William | |
| 245 | 0 | 0 | _aNot a true reflection |
| 260 | _c2007 | ||
| 490 |
_aEstates Gazette _v(0727) 7 July 2007, 292-294(3) |
||
| 520 | _aReports on recent cases including Level Properties V Balls Brothers (L137934) which may have a considerable affect on the way valuers approach rent reviews. Marklands Ltd V Virgin Retail Ltd was criticised for distorting the market approach. It held that if a tenant threatens to take multiple cheaper alternative properties, a landlord cannot threaten to multi-let to secure higher rent from a single bidder. Level Properties showed that a landlord was free to consider the higher yield of either a single or double let. This was based on a clause particular to the case, and may not directly contradict Marklands. | ||
| 590 | _aKA | ||
| 651 | 4 |
_aEngland and Wales _y1543- |
|
| 690 | _aPROPERTY-LANDLORD AND TENANT-LEASES | ||
| 700 | 1 | _aDurgan, Martin | |
| 942 | _n0 | ||
| 999 |
_c79000 _d79000 |
||