December 2018
M T W T F S S
« Jul    
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31  

Halliard Property Co Ltd v Jack Segal Ltd; 1978

References: [1978] 1 WLR 377, [1978] 1 All ER 1219
Coram: Goulding J
The court considered a proviso for re-entry that: ‘forfeiture on the bankruptcy of the lessee is considered as a case of breach of condition.’
Held: It was clearly a condition rather than a mere covenant of the original protected tenancy that the tenant should not become a bankrupt and this condition had been broken by the tenant. The court declined an application to amend to rely upon a fresh ground of forfeiture (namely bankruptcy) when no notice under section 146 Law of Property Act 1925 had been served before the commencement of the proceedings.
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Cadogan Estates Limited v McMahon HL (Times 01-Nov-00, House of Lords, Gazette 09-Nov-00, House of Lords, Gazette 16-Nov-00, House of Lords, House of Lords, Bailii, [2000] 3 WLR 1555, [2000] UKHL 52, [2001] 1 EGLR 47, [2001] BPIR 17, [2001] 1 AC 378, (2001) 81 P & CR DG11, (2001) 33 HLR 42, [2000] 4 All ER 897, [2001] L & TR 2, [2000] NPC 110, [2000] EG 119, [2001] 06 EG 164)
    When a tenancy was terminated and was followed by a statutory tenancy, a term in the contractual tenancy that the tenancy should be forfeit on the tenant’s bankruptcy was continued in and inherited by the statutory tenancy. Though perhaps in . .
  • Cited – Midtown Ltd v City of London Real Property Company Ltd ChD (Bailii, [2005] EWHC 33 (Ch), Times 14-Feb-05, [2005] 14 EG 130)
    Tenants occupied land next to land which was to be developed after compulsory acquisition. The tenants and the landlords asserted a right of light over the land, and sought an injunction to prevent the development. The developer denied that any . .

Last Update: 03-Sep-15 Ref: 196913

Leave a Reply