Monella & Anor v Pizza Express (Restaurants) Ltd [2003] EWHC 2966 (Ch) (27 November 2003)

Monella & Anor v Pizza Express (Restaurants) Ltd [2003] EWHC 2966 (Ch) (27 November 2003)

The claimants' failure to comply with the time bar was not caused by circumstances outside the reasonable contemplation of the parties at the time of the lease. The change in law regarding time being of the essence was foreseeable and did not contribute to the failure to act in time. Therefore, the court had no jurisdiction to extend time under section 12 of the Arbitration Act 1996.

Citation
[2003] EWHC 2966 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Paul Paolino Montalto Monella; Claimant: Gro Montalto Monella; Defendant: Pizza Express (Restaurants) Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 November 2003
Procedural Posture
Application Under Arbitration Act 1996 Section 12 / Judgment on Application for Extension of Time
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Extension of Time for Arbitration, Rent Review Clauses, Time of the Essence, Change in Law, Contractual Time Bars
Arbitration Landlord and Tenant Contract Extension of Time for Arbitration Rent Review Clauses Time of the Essence Change in Law Contractual Time Bars

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Paul Paolino Montalto Monella

Claimant

Gro Montalto Monella

Claimant

Pizza Express (Restaurants) Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application Under Arbitration Act 1996 Section 12 / Judgment on Application for Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court should extend time under section 12 of the Arbitration Act 1996 for the appointment of an arbitrator to determine revised rent under a lease rent review clause
  2. 2 Whether a change in the law regarding time being of the essence constitutes a circumstance outside the reasonable contemplation of the parties under section 12(3)

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants' failure to comply with the time bar was not caused by circumstances outside the reasonable contemplation of the parties at the time of the lease. The change in law regarding time being of the essence was foreseeable and did not contribute to the failure to act in time. Therefore, the court had no jurisdiction to extend time under section 12 of the Arbitration Act 1996.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed