Miller v Clerical Medical Investment Group Ltd & Anor [2001] ScotCS 189 (18 July 2001)

Miller v Clerical Medical Investment Group Ltd & Anor [2001] ScotCS 189 (18 July 2001)

The lease did not confer on the pursuer any general right of occupancy over the common parts, only limited rights of access, and expressly reserved to the landlord broad rights to regulate and use those parts. Scots law does not imply a restriction on the landlord from letting other parts of the property to competing businesses absent an express or clearly implied term. No relevant case of derogation from grant or breach of lease was established by the pursuer.

Citation
[2001] ScotCS 189
Parties
Pursuer: Sheila Miller; Defenders: Clerical Medical Investment Group Limited and Another
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
18 July 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil (landlord and Tenant Dispute) / Outer House, Court of Session – Opinion on Relevancy and Dismissal
Outcome
Action dismissed
Legal Topics
Implied Terms in Leases, Derogation From Grant, Competition Between Tenants, Rights Over Common Parts, Service Charges
Landlord and Tenant Property Law Contract Law Implied Terms in Leases Derogation From Grant Competition Between Tenants Rights Over Common Parts Service Charges

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sheila Miller

Pursuer

Clerical Medical Investment Group Limited and Another

Defenders

Procedural Posture

Civil (landlord and Tenant Dispute) / Outer House, Court of Session – Opinion on Relevancy and Dismissal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the landlord is prohibited from granting occupancy rights in common parts to competing traders
  2. 2 Whether the lease or law implies a restriction on the landlord from permitting competition with the tenant
  3. 3 Whether the presence of a kiosk constitutes derogation from grant or breach of lease

Ratio Decidendi

The lease did not confer on the pursuer any general right of occupancy over the common parts, only limited rights of access, and expressly reserved to the landlord broad rights to regulate and use those parts. Scots law does not imply a restriction on the landlord from letting other parts of the property to competing businesses absent an express or clearly implied term. No relevant case of derogation from grant or breach of lease was established by the pursuer.

Court Disposition

Action dismissed

Orders

  • First plea-in-law for the defenders upheld
  • Action dismissed