header-logo header-logo

21 July 2017
Issue: 7755 / Categories: Case law , Landlord&tenant
printer mail-detail

Landlord & tenant

S Franses Ltd v Cavendish Hotel (London) Ltd [2017] EWHC 1670 (QB), [2017] All ER (D) 95 (Jul)

The judge, in having dismissed the appellant tenant’s claim for a new tenancy because the respondent landlord had established its ground of opposition, had failed to explain why he had generously decided that a reasonable time for commencing construction works had been within 12 months of obtaining vacant possession. The Queen’s Bench Division also upheld the tenant’s appeal on the ground that the judge had erred in considering the entirety of the works and failing to exclude works which could not be carried out under the landlord’s right of entry.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

EIP—Stuart Malcolm

EIP—Stuart Malcolm

EIP strengthens Commercial practice with a new partner

Ellisons—Francesca Brown

Ellisons—Francesca Brown

Ellisons welcomes Francesca Brown to Family team

Shakespeare Martineau—Marie Bourke

Shakespeare Martineau—Marie Bourke

Shakespeare Martineau strengthens Sheffield regulatory practice with new hires

NEWS
A wide-ranging Civil Way column highlights developments from insolvency procedure to employment law, but one case stands out for its lessons on bankruptcy, family homes and digital communications
A sprawling Intellectual Property Office battle between House of Fraser and Frasers Property has delivered a masterclass in modern trade mark law
Courts in England and Wales and Singapore are increasingly confronting complex disputes over international child relocation as families become more globally mobile
The government’s long-awaited family law reform consultation could mark a turning point for domestic abuse victims navigating financial remedy proceedings, but significant challenges remain
A new commercial court pilot giving the public access to documents used in hearings, including expert reports, is raising difficult questions about transparency and privacy
back-to-top-scroll