000			01847cab a22002295a 4500
001			L139642
008			070802e20070627xxk f w 000 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u139642
041	0		_aeng
245	0	0	_aBusiness Environment Bow Lane Limited V Deanwater Estates Limited _h[electronic resource]
260			_c2007
520			_a[2007] EWCA Civ 622, 27 June 2007. B appealed against a decision that it was prevented by collateral contract from making charges for claims against the respondent D. D had negotiated the letting of premises from B's predecessor. D had terminated the contract with the predecessor upon agreement that the predecessor would not serve a schedule of dilapidations. B submitted that the judge's decision went further than previous cases in deciding the strictness of the test for a collateral contract, and that documentary evidence showed that the parties intended the issue to be dealt with by other means. D submitted that a collateral contract was implicit in the conclusion of the main contract. "Held": D had no defence to the claim based on collateral contract. Although well-established, collateral contracts with relation to land leases needed to be approached with caution, if not suspicion. If the binding promise was one in contract of disposition or sale, it would be unenforceable unless contained in written contract.
590			_aKA
650	2	4	_aHEILBUT, SYMONS & CO V BUCKLETON
650	2	4	_aBRIKOM INVESTMENTS LTD V CARR
650	2	4	_aINNTREPRENEUR PUB COMPANY LIMITED V EAST CROWN LIMITED
650	2	4	_aLAW OF PROPERTY (MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS) ACT 1989 S2
651		4	_aEngland and Wales _y1543-
690			_aPROPERTY-LANDLORD AND TENANT-DILAPIDATIONS
856	4	0	_uhttps://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2007/622.html _zView the item free of charge at www.bailii.org...
942			_n0
999			_c79061 _d79061