M7 REAL ESTATE INVESTMENTS PARTNERS VI INDUSTRIAL PROPCO LTD AGAINST AMAZON UK SERVICES LTD [2019] ScotCS CSOH_73 (01 October 2019)

M7 REAL ESTATE INVESTMENTS PARTNERS VI INDUSTRIAL PROPCO LTD AGAINST AMAZON UK SERVICES LTD [2019] ScotCS CSOH_73 (01 October 2019)

The proviso in section 34 of the Sheriff Courts (Scotland) Act 1907 does not make a substantive change to the law on tacit relocation; it applies only when the statutory procedure for removal without an action for removing is used. The pursuer's notice to quit was valid under common law and sufficient to terminate the lease.

Citation
[2019] ScotCS CSOH_73
Parties
Pursuer: M7 Real Estate Investments Partners VI Industrial Propco Limited; Defender: Amazon UK Services Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
01 October 2019
Procedural Posture
Commercial Lease Dispute / Final Judgment
Outcome
judgment for pursuer
Legal Topics
Interpretation of Section 34 Sheriff Courts (scotland) Act 1907, Tacit Relocation, Notice to Quit, Lease Termination
Property Law Landlord and Tenant Law Interpretation of Section 34 Sheriff Courts (scotland) Act 1907 Tacit Relocation Notice to Quit Lease Termination

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 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M7 Real Estate Investments Partners VI Industrial Propco Limited

Pursuer

Amazon UK Services Limited

Defender

Procedural Posture

Commercial Lease Dispute / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the proviso in section 34 of the Sheriff Courts (Scotland) Act 1907 alters the substantive law of tacit relocation or is limited to the statutory procedure for removal without an action for removing

Ratio Decidendi

The proviso in section 34 of the Sheriff Courts (Scotland) Act 1907 does not make a substantive change to the law on tacit relocation; it applies only when the statutory procedure for removal without an action for removing is used. The pursuer's notice to quit was valid under common law and sufficient to terminate the lease.

Court Disposition

judgment for pursuer

Orders

  • Decree granted in terms of the first, second, and third conclusions: declarator that the notice to quit was valid, declarator that the defender was obliged to remove, and decree for removal.
  • Further procedure ordered for discussion regarding damages for occupation after lease termination.