Cases - Corporation of London v Davy's of London (Wine Merchants) Ltd
Record details
- Name
- Corporation of London v Davy's of London (Wine Merchants) Ltd
- Date
- [2004]; [2004]
- Citation
- 229 EG 117 (CS); EWHC 2224
- Legislation
- Keywords
- Landlord and tenant – business premises – insertion of redevelopment break clause - admission of fresh evidence on appeal of redevelopment intentions
- Summary
-
229 EG 117 (CS)
This case concerned an unopposed lease renewal where the landlord was seeking the insertion of a redevelopment break clause in the renewal lease. At the County Court trial (November 2003), the Court ordered that a landlord's redevelopment break clause should be inserted, but not until after several years. Both the landlord and the tenant appealed against the decision, but before the hearing of the appeal in the High Court in July 2004, a third party purchased the property from the landlord. That third party was made a party to the proceedings and was allowed to put in fresh evidence of its own (different) future redevelopment intentions, which resulted in the appeal court bringing forward the break date, based on the fresh evidence. (See also Landlord's grounds of opposition to renewal.)
EWHC 2224
The test for considering whether a redevelopment break clause should be inserted in a new tenancy involved 2 propositions, namely that, so far as reasonable:
- a new tenancy should not prevent a landlord from developing; and
- reasonable degree of security should be provided to the tenant.
Lewison J took into account new evidence submitted on the appeal (which was by way of a rehearing), the appeal date being the relevant date for determining the terms of the new tenancy. A break clause was inserted in terms which allowed for the landlord's 'fall back exit strategy' of a sale to a developer within 2 to 4 years.