| 000 | 01297cad a22002055a 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | L152855 | ||
| 008 | 110506e20100611xxk 000 0 eng d | ||
| 035 | _a(Sirsi) u152855 | ||
| 041 | 0 | _aeng | |
| 245 | 0 | 0 | _aHexstone Holdings v AHC Westlink |
| 260 | _c2011 | ||
| 520 | _a[2010] EWHC 1280 (Ch) 11 June 2010. Concerns the problem of how to exercise break rights in leases effectively. Defendant tenant (A) tried to exercise a break clause in a lease granted by claimant landlord (H) after A had merged with Eddie Stobart Ltd (E). E, a separate company, served the break notice rather than A. H contended that the break notice was invalid because it did not bear A's name. "Held": HC found for H because the notice was misleading. No evidence proved that A had authorised E to serve the break notice. A should have signed the break notice. | ||
| 590 | _aKA | ||
| 650 | 2 | 4 | _aHEXSTONE HOLDINGS LTD V AHC WESTLINK LTD |
| 650 | 2 | 4 | _aMANNAI INVESTMENT CO LTD V EAGLE STAR LIFE ASSURANCE CO LTD UK |
| 651 | 4 |
_aEngland and Wales _y1543- |
|
| 690 | _aPROPERTY-COMMERCIAL PROPERTY-LEASEHOLD COMMERCIAL PROPERTY-COMMERCIAL LANDLORD AND TENANT-COMMERCIAL LEASES | ||
| 856 | 4 | 0 |
_uhttps://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2010/1280.html _zView the law report free of charge at www.bailii.org |
| 942 | _n0 | ||
| 999 |
_c83123 _d83123 |
||