The respondents sought to strike out the claim for conspiracy and failure to comply with the Act. The respondent was landlord of premises occupied by the claimants. They had served a notice under the Act of their intention to sell.
Held: The 1987 Act did not confer a right to pre-emption as such. Having gone through the procedure the landlord could still sell elsewhere. He was not under an obligation to disclose every term of the proposed disposal. The Act does not allow a right to claim damages for breach of statutory duty. The Act had provided for a remedy for a failure to serve a correct notice, and the second action was itself an abuse of process.
Judges:
Justice Laddie
Citations:
Gazette 18-May-2000, [2000] EWHC Ch 178, [2001] Ch 493
Links:
Statutes:
Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 5
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
See Also – Michaels and Michaels v Harley House (Marylebone) Limited CA 20-Jun-1997
The respondent sought security for costs. One plaintiff was bankrupt, and an outstanding costs order had not been met.
Held: The matter should not be adjourned pending an application for legal aid, and nor should the considerable interest in . .
Cited by:
Approved – Mahonia Limited v JP Morgan Chase Bankwest Lb Ag QBD 3-Aug-2004
The Claimant claimed on a letter of credit issued by the Defendant on behalf of Enron Ltd, who asserted it was not liable to pay there having been unlawful behaviour by Enron Ltd. Swap agreements had been entered into, and the defendant said the . .
See Also – Michaels and Michaels v Harley House (Marylebone) Limited CA 20-Jun-1997
The respondent sought security for costs. One plaintiff was bankrupt, and an outstanding costs order had not been met.
Held: The matter should not be adjourned pending an application for legal aid, and nor should the considerable interest in . .
Cited – Meretz Investments Nv and Another v ACP Ltd and others ChD 30-Jan-2006
The applicant challenged the exercise of a power of sale under a mortgage, saying that the mortgagee’s purposes included purposes not those under the mortgage. The parties had been involved in an attempted development of a penthouse.
Held: The . .
Cited – Total Network Sl v Customs and Excise Commissioners CA 31-Jan-2007
The defendants suspected a carousel VAT fraud. The defendants appealed a finding that there was a viable cause of action alleging a ‘conspiracy where the unlawful means alleged is a common law offence of cheating the public revenue’. The defendants . .
Doubted – Total Network Sl v Revenue and Customs HL 12-Mar-2008
The House was asked whether an action for unlawful means conspiracy was available against a participant in a missing trader intra-community, or carousel, fraud. The company appealed a finding of liability saying that the VAT Act and Regulations . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Landlord and Tenant, Torts – Other
Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.135764
