| 翻訳と辞書 |
| Ashburn Anstalt v Arnold ： ウィキペディア英語版 |
Ashburn Anstalt v Arnold
''Ashburn Anstalt v Arnold'' () (EWCA Civ 14 ) is an English land law case decided by the Court of Appeal. It establishes that in English law rent is not required for the creation of a tenancy. However its judgement on the requirements on certainty of duration of a lease has been discredited by ''Prudential Assurance Co v London Residuary Body'' (2 AC 386 )
==Facts==
Arnold & Co had a lease of some business premises at 126 Gloucester Road, Kensington, London. It sold the lease to Matlodge Ltd, who promised Arnold & Co could remain for free in occupation as ‘licensees’ until any redevelopment on a quarter’s notice in writing, and that on redevelopment that they should get a lease of a shop in a prime position at the development with 1000 square metres and car parking. Then Cavendish Land Co Ltd acquired both the freehold and the lease, accepting the contractual duties to Arnold & Co. Then Cavendish was taken over by Legal & General Assurance Society Ltd, which accepted the contract. Then L&G sold its freehold to Ashburn Anstalt, which also took the freehold ‘subject to’ the Arnold & Co contract. It had no redevelopment plans but sought possession anyway. Arnold & Co argued that its interest bound Ashburn Anstalt, as it was a lease, and thus an overriding interest under LRA 1925 section 70. If it was just a licence, it should bind anyway, under ''Errington v Errington'' or be a constructive trust.
Evans-Lombe QC held the agreement created only a licence but that licence bound Ashburn Anstalt, and possession was refused.
抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』
■ウィキペディアで「Ashburn Anstalt v Arnold」の詳細全文を読む
スポンサード リンク
| 翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース |
Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.
|
|