| 000 | 01092cam a22002055a 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | L150063 | ||
| 008 | 100526s2010 xxk 000 0 eng d | ||
| 035 | _a(Sirsi) u150063 | ||
| 041 | 0 | _aeng | |
| 100 | 1 | _aJohn, Ed | |
| 245 | 0 | 0 | _aBreaking-up is hard to undo, particularly after a break notice has been served |
| 260 | _c2010 | ||
| 490 | 0 |
_aLovells Real Estate Quarterly _vSpring 2010, 16-18(3) |
|
| 520 | _aReviews the problems and inadvertent consequences for tenants of agreeing to withdraw a break notice after it has been served. If tenant and landlord agree the notice to be withdrawn, the break notice remains effective but their conduct is deemed to have created a new tenancy on the expiry of the break notice. Case law on this proposition originates from Tayleur v Wildin (1868). Advises tenants to register the deemed new tenancies straightaway. | ||
| 590 | _aKA | ||
| 650 | 2 | 4 | _aTAYLEUR V WILDIN |
| 651 | 4 |
_aEngland and Wales _y1543- |
|
| 690 | _aPROPERTY-COMMERCIAL PROPERTY-LEASEHOLD COMMERCIAL PROPERTY-COMMERCIAL LANDLORD AND TENANT-BUSINESS TENANCIES | ||
| 942 | _n0 | ||
| 999 |
_c82377 _d82377 |
||