000			01741cab a22001935a 4500
001			L144747
008			080807e20080802xxk f v 000 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u144747
041	0		_aeng
245	0	0	_aMcDonalds Real Estate LLP v Arundel Corporation
260			_c2008
490		0	_aEstates Gazette _v(830) 2 August 2008, 84-88(5)
520			_aProvides detailed case notes on McDonalds Real Estate v Arundel Corporation [2008] EWCH 377 (Ch), 16 January 2008. The case shows the potential problems involved in drafting rent review clauses based on hypothetical lettings. The court had to determine the assessment of rent on a rent review for a warehouse used as a drive-thru restaurant. In 1986, McDonalds took out a fifty year lease on an old factory with a view to converting it into a drive-through. The lease provided the building to be treated as a warehouse with 15% office space at rent review. The case turned on whether, where there were no suitable comparables, the open market rent of the restaurant should be determined on the basis of a retail warehouse. The landlord argued that warehouse could include retail warehouses, which generate a significantly higher rent than storage warehouses. The Court had to decide what sort of warehouse was intended. Held: claim allowed in part. A storage warehouse had been intended, but there was no restriction on the usage of the word. The landlord may seek to have the building's retail value reflected in the rent review.
590			_aKA
650	2	4	_aMCDONALDS REAL ESTATE V ARUNDEL CORPORATION
651		4	_aEngland and Wales _y1543-
690			_aPROPERTY-COMMERCIAL PROPERTY-COMMERCIAL LANDLORD AND TENANT-BUSINESS TENANCIES-RENT REVIEW (BUSINESS TENANCIES)
942			_n0
999			_c80569 _d80569