The tenant sought to exercise a break clause in the lease. The landlord replied that it had not complied with its obligations for repair. The tenant said its compliance was sufficient in the material respects necessary.
Held: The tenant had complied sufficiently, and the notice breaking the lease was effective.
Judges:
Thornton QC J
Citations:
[2005] EWHC 2391 (TCC), [2005] 46 EGCS 176
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Littman and Another v Aspen Oil (Broking) Ltd CA 19-Dec-2005
A lease had been granted with a break clause, which the tenant exercised. The Landlord said it had not complied with its obligations and was not free to exercise that clause. The clause had included the word ‘landlord’ where it should have read . .
Appeal from – Fitzroy House Epworth Street (No. 1) Ltd and Another v Financial Times Ltd CA 31-Mar-2006
The defendant tenant sought to exercise a break clause in the lease. The landlord said that the notice was deficient because the tenant had failed ‘materially to comply with’ its repairing obligations. The judge found the cost of repairs were . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Landlord and Tenant
Updated: 22 November 2022; Ref: scu.235374
