Eaton Mansions (Westminster) Ltd v Stinger Compania De Inversion SA
EMW's refusal of consent was not unreasonable given the Grosvenor Estate's opposition and the risk of breach of the Headlease Covenant; Stinger had no real prospect of successfully defending the trespass claim, and proprietary estoppel did not apply to override EMW's rights.
- Parties
- Claimant/respondent: Eaton Mansions (Westminster) Ltd; Defendant/appellant: Stinger Compania de Inversion S. A.
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 18 May 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Appeal Judgment and Orders
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Trespass, Proprietary Estoppel, Leasehold Covenants, Consent for Alterations, Costs Assessment
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Eaton Mansions (Westminster) Ltd
Claimant/respondent
Stinger Compania de Inversion S. A.
Defendant/appellant
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Judgment and Orders
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether installation of air conditioning units on roof constituted trespass
- 2 Whether consent for installation was unreasonably withheld
- 3 Whether proprietary estoppel applied to allow retention of apparatus
Ratio Decidendi
EMW's refusal of consent was not unreasonable given the Grosvenor Estate's opposition and the risk of breach of the Headlease Covenant; Stinger had no real prospect of successfully defending the trespass claim, and proprietary estoppel did not apply to override EMW's rights.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Appellant to pay Respondent’s costs of appeal, including application to adduce additional evidence
- Costs assessed summarily at £33,000 including VAT
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment