Watergate Properties (Ellesmere) Ltd v Securicor Cash Services Ltd [2005] EWHC 3438 (Ch) (8 November 2005)

Watergate Properties (Ellesmere) Ltd v Securicor Cash Services Ltd [2005] EWHC 3438 (Ch) (8 November 2005)

The arbitrator was obviously wrong to deduct supplementary rent in determining market rent at the review date, as the supplementary rent was no longer payable and including it would perpetuate a spent liability contrary to established principles of lease interpretation.

Citation
[2005] EWHC 3438 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Watergate Properties (Ellesmere) Ltd; Defendant: Securicor Cash Services Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 November 2005
Procedural Posture
Application for Permission to Appeal Under Arbitration Act 1996 / High Court Judgment on Permission to Appeal and Appeal
Outcome
Permission to appeal granted; appeal allowed; arbitrator's award varied by removing the supplementary rent deduction.
Legal Topics
Rent Review, Interpretation of Lease, Arbitration Appeals, Supplementary Rent, Market Rent Determination
Arbitration Landlord and Tenant Property Law Rent Review Interpretation of Lease Arbitration Appeals Supplementary Rent Market Rent Determination

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Watergate Properties (Ellesmere) Ltd

Claimant

Securicor Cash Services Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Permission to Appeal Under Arbitration Act 1996 / High Court Judgment on Permission to Appeal and Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitrator was obviously wrong to include a supplementary rent deduction in determining market rent at the rent review date
  2. 2 Whether the hypothetical lease for rent review should include an obligation to pay supplementary rent after it ceased to be payable

Ratio Decidendi

The arbitrator was obviously wrong to deduct supplementary rent in determining market rent at the review date, as the supplementary rent was no longer payable and including it would perpetuate a spent liability contrary to established principles of lease interpretation.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal granted; appeal allowed; arbitrator's award varied by removing the supplementary rent deduction.

Orders

  • Permission to appeal granted
  • Appeal allowed