77387
Descripción
Test por nathan_hutchings, actualizado hace más de 1 año
|
Creado por nathan_hutchings
hace alrededor de 11 años
|
|
Pregunta 1
Pregunta
The covenant
Respuesta
-
Contractual terms contained in a lease
-
Implied covenants
-
Express covenants
-
Estate in land
Pregunta 2
Pregunta
Implied covenants
Respuesta
-
Plug gaps when parties fail to agree expressly
-
Common Law or Statute
-
Implied covenants always prevail of express covenants
Pregunta 3
Pregunta
Examples of L’s covenants implied by common law
Respuesta
-
Covenant for quiet enjoyment
-
Covenant to keep common parts in reasonable repair
-
Covenant to pay rent, rates and taxes
-
Covenant to allow L to discharge his repairing obligation
Pregunta 4
Pregunta
Examples of T’s covenants implied by common law
Respuesta
-
Covenant to pay rent, rates and taxes
-
Covenant to allow L to discharge his repairing obligation
-
Covenant for quiet enjoyment
-
Covenant to keep common parts in reasonable repair
Pregunta 5
Pregunta
Covenants implied by statute
Respuesta
-
Improve minimum standard of protection provided for L and T by common law
-
Can usually override express agreement of parties (note contrast with covenants implied by common law)
-
Express agreements always prevail
-
Most statutes which imply terms provide that parties cannot contract out by express agreement
Pregunta 6
Pregunta
Express covenants
Respuesta
-
Expressly agreed between the parties as result of negotiations
-
In commercial context L and T can often afford to appoint solicitors and leases can be lengthy and complex
Pregunta 7
Pregunta
Typical express covenants
Respuesta
-
Rent
-
Rent review
-
Repair
-
User
-
Alterations
-
Alienation (assignment and subletting)
-
Covenant for quiet enjoyment
-
Covenant to keep common parts in reasonable repair
Pregunta 8
Pregunta
Repairs
Respuesta
-
Parties free to allocate responsibility as they please
-
Parties not free to allocate responsibility as they please
-
L solely responsible (likely to recover cost from T through service charge)
-
T solely responsible
-
L and T share responsibility – most common arrangement : – L repairs structure and exterior (likely to recover costs through service charge) - T repairs interior
Pregunta 9
Pregunta
Most common arrangement for repairing covenant
Respuesta
-
L solely responsible (likely to recover cost from T through service charge)
-
T solely responsible
-
L and T share responsibility – most common arrangement : – L repairs structure and exterior (likely to recover costs through service charge) - T repairs interior
Pregunta 10
Pregunta
Steps for disrepair?
Respuesta
-
1) First identify physical extent of premises to which repairing covenant extends
-
2) First identify physical extent of premises to which repairing covenant extends
-
2) Is there disrepair? Must be deterioration from a previous physical state
-
1) Is there disrepair? Must be deterioration from a previous physical state
Pregunta 11
Pregunta
Windows - not deteriorated from previous physical state
Respuesta
-
Lace v Chantler
-
Walsh v Lonsdale 1882
-
Quick v. Taff Ely B.C.
-
Aslan v Murphy
Pregunta 12
Pregunta
What is the standard of repair?
Respuesta
-
Guidance in the lease as to the standard of repair
-
No guidance in the lease as to the standard of repair
Pregunta 13
Pregunta
‘fair wear and tear’ exception
Respuesta
-
natural deterioration
-
T not liable for such damage if there is a fair wear and tear exception
-
T liable for such damage if there is a fair wear and tear exception
-
Has to be expressed in the repairing covenant
-
Implied in repairing covenant
Pregunta 14
Pregunta
This will define standard of repair by reference to condition of property at start of lease
Respuesta
-
schedule of condition
-
schedule of dilapidations
-
‘fair wear and tear’ exception
Pregunta 15
Pregunta
Standard of repair when lease does not give guidance
- put premises into state of repair contemplated by covenant
and then to
- keep premises in repair
Respuesta
-
Proudfoot v Hart (1980)
-
Quick v. Taff Ely B.C. [1986]
-
Aslan v Murphy
Pregunta 16
Pregunta
Implication of ‘reasonableness’ requirement
- L must act reasonably when carrying out repairs
- T cannot insist that works undertaken more cheaply if L is being reasonable in his approach
Respuesta
-
FluorDaniel Properties v Shortland Investments [2001]
-
Aslan v Murphy
-
Calthorpe v McOscar
-
Proudfoot v Hart (1890)
Pregunta 17
Pregunta
Many leases require repair but not renewal
Respuesta
-
Is there liability to do something about the disrepair?
-
What is the standard of repair?
-
Obligation to renew is more onerous than obligation to repair
Pregunta 18
Pregunta
Remedying of disrepair and inherent defect fell within scope of T’s covenant to repair
Work required was repair not renewal
Respuesta
-
Ravenseft Properties Ltd v. Davstone (Holdings) Ltd [1980]
-
National car parks v Trinity Development Co 2001
-
FluorDaniel Properties v Shortland Investments [2001]
-
Proudfoot v Hart (1890)
Pregunta 19
Pregunta
CA set out three guidelines for repairing covenants
Respuesta
-
McDougall v Easington D.C. (1989)
-
National car parks v Trinity Development Co 2001
-
Lister v Lane (1893)
-
Ravenseft Properties Ltd v. Davstone (Holdings) Ltd [1980]
Pregunta 20
Pregunta
Three guidelines: a) Do the alterations..
Respuesta
-
affect the whole or substantially the whole of the building?
-
make the building different in character from the building originally let?
-
cost a significant proportion of the value of the previous existing building?
Pregunta 21
Pregunta
Three guidelines: b) Do the alterations..
Respuesta
-
affect the whole or substantially the whole of the building?
-
make the building different in character from the building originally let?
-
cost a significant proportion of the value of the previous existing building?
Pregunta 22
Pregunta
Three guidelines: c) Do the alterations..
Respuesta
-
affect the whole or substantially the whole of the building?
-
make the building different in character from the building originally let?
-
cost a significant proportion of the value of the previous existing building?
Pregunta 23
Pregunta
Alienation: T disposing of lease
Respuesta
-
Assign
-
Sub-let
-
Mortgage
-
Part with or share possession
-
Part with or share occupation
-
Terminate
-
Surrender
Pregunta 24
Pregunta
Alienation
Respuesta
-
T is free to dispose of premises as he chooses unless lease contains restriction on T’s right to dispose
-
T is not free to dispose of premises as he chooses unless lease contains restriction on T’s right to dispose
Pregunta 25
Pregunta
Three categories of restrictive lease covenants:
Respuesta
-
Absolute covenant
-
Qualified covenant
-
Fully qualified covenant
-
Fully unqualified covenant
-
Unqualified covenant
Pregunta 26
Pregunta
Absolute covenant
Respuesta
-
T prohibited altogether from doing something
-
T may do the thing in question but only with L’s consent
-
T may do the thing in question with L’s consent and that consent must not be unreasonably withheld
Pregunta 27
Pregunta
Qualified covenant
Respuesta
-
T may do the thing in question but only with L’s consent
-
T prohibited altogether from doing something
-
T may do the thing in question with L’s consent and that consent must not be unreasonably withheld
Pregunta 28
Pregunta
Fully qualified covenant
Respuesta
-
T prohibited altogether from doing something
-
T may do the thing in question but only with L’s consent
-
T may do the thing in question with L’s consent and that consent must not be unreasonably withheld
Pregunta 29
Pregunta
Absolute covenants against alienation
Respuesta
-
If T disposes of premises he will be in breach of covenant but disposal still valid
-
Note also L may waive prohibition
-
Prevented from disposing of interest unless can negotiate with L and obtain L’s consent to a disposal
Pregunta 30
Pregunta
Qualified and fully qualified covenants against alienation
Respuesta
-
T could request consent but L could still refuse consent on any grounds whatsoever
-
T could request consent and L could not refuse consent
-
T is helped when there is a qualified covenant by section 144 LPA 1925 and section 19(1)(a) LTA 1927
-
T is not helped when there is a qualified covenant by section 144 LPA 1925 and section 19(1)(a) LTA 1927
Pregunta 31
Pregunta
Section 144 LPA 1925
Respuesta
-
L cannot demand payment for his consent – only expenses
-
Converts qualified covenants against alienation into fully qualified covenants against alienation
Pregunta 32
Pregunta
Section 19(1)(a) LTA 1927
Respuesta
-
Converts qualified covenants against alienation into fully qualified covenants against alienation
-
L cannot demand payment for his consent – only expenses
Pregunta 33
Pregunta
LTA 1988 Section 1(3)
Respuesta
-
L is under a duty: - to give consent unless reasonable not to
-
- to serve written notice on T of decision - within a reasonable time stating why any consent is withheld or the conditions subject to which it is granted
-
T can sue L for damages if L fails to comply with duty
Pregunta 34
Pregunta
Section 4
Respuesta
-
L is under a duty: - to give consent unless reasonable not to
-
T can sue L for damages if L fails to comply with duty
Pregunta 35
Pregunta
What is a reasonable time?
Respuesta
-
Clear that L must act quickly
-
Three weeks reasonable in a complex case
Pregunta 36
Pregunta
When is it unreasonable to refuse consent?
Respuesta
-
Depends upon circumstances of particular case
-
General principle = L not entitled to refuse consent for reasons which are not connected to subject matter of lease
-
E.g. Proposed new T is of insufficient financial standing
-
Proposed new T’s race or gender
Pregunta 37
Pregunta
LTA 1927 section 19(1A)
Respuesta
-
Applies only to leases of commercial premises granted on or after 1st January 1996
-
Affects only assignments
-
Applies only to leases of commercial premises granted on or after 1st January 1993
¿Quieres crear tus propios Tests gratis con GoConqr? Más información.