000			01295cab a22002175a 4500
001			L143236
008			080418s2008 xxk f v 000 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u143236
041	0		_aeng
245	0	0	_aBusiness leases _bcontracting out, update
260			_c2008
490		0	_aCommercial Leases _v22(2) March 2008, 1307-1308(2)
520			_aReports the outcome of the appeal in Patel v Chiltern Railway Co Ltd [2008] EWCA Civ 178. The case is a useful reminder to practitioners to follow procedure. The appellant tenant (Patel) had argued the business tenancies she had entered into were not contracted out properly, and thus she had security of tenure. Covers the health warnings regime; brief facts of the case and the outcome. Held: the appeal was dismissed. Suggests that whilst the landlord won the case, the expense and delay incurred means that it is wise to avoid any scope for argument in the first place.
590			_aKA
650	2	4	_aPATEL V CHILTERN RAILWAY CO LTD
650	2	4	_aLANDLORD AND TENANT ACT 1954
650	2	4	_aREGULATORY REFORM (BUSINESS TENANCIES) (ENGLAND AND WALES) ORDER 2003
651		4	_aEngland and Wales _y1543-
690			_aPROPERTY-COMMERCIAL PROPERTY-LEASEHOLD COMMERCIAL PROPERTY-COMMERCIAL LANDLORD AND TENANT-COMMERCIAL LEASES
942			_n0
999			_c80103 _d80103