PDPF GP Ltd v Santander UK PLC [2015] ScotCS CSOH_40 (14 April 2015)

PDPF GP Ltd v Santander UK PLC [2015] ScotCS CSOH_40 (14 April 2015)

The lease did not require three months' notice for terminal dilapidations; the relevant obligations were independent and not subject to the notice period in paragraph 8. No term of reasonable notice could be implied into the licence agreements as it would contradict the express terms. The schedule of dilapidations constituted valid notice despite referencing the wrong clause, as the error was patent and not misleading.

Citation
[2015] ScotCS CSOH_40
Parties
Pursuer: PDPF GP Limited; Defender: Santander UK PLC
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
14 April 2015
Procedural Posture
Commercial Lease Dispute / Opinion Following Submissions, Prior to Proof
Outcome
By order hearing fixed; further factual matters remain; all questions of expenses reserved.
Legal Topics
Dilapidations, Notice Requirements, Implied Terms, Lease Obligations, Licence Agreements
Property Law Landlord and Tenant Law Contract Law Dilapidations Notice Requirements Implied Terms Lease Obligations Licence Agreements

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 5 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

PDPF GP Limited

Pursuer

Santander UK PLC

Defender

Procedural Posture

Commercial Lease Dispute / Opinion Following Submissions, Prior to Proof

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the lease required three months' notice for dilapidations at expiry
  2. 2 Whether a term of reasonable notice should be implied into the licence agreements
  3. 3 Whether the schedule of dilapidations constituted valid notice

Ratio Decidendi

The lease did not require three months' notice for terminal dilapidations; the relevant obligations were independent and not subject to the notice period in paragraph 8. No term of reasonable notice could be implied into the licence agreements as it would contradict the express terms. The schedule of dilapidations constituted valid notice despite referencing the wrong clause, as the error was patent and not misleading.

Court Disposition

By order hearing fixed; further factual matters remain; all questions of expenses reserved.