This case was not successful since the Court held that the expert had provided a valid assessment and did not owe any overriding duties to the parties; he owed only the same duties as any other valuer. Moreover, there exists a clear provision in the CPR that the overriding duty of the experts is to the Courts, which is more important than “any obligation to the person from whom he has received instructions or by whom he is paid.”9 In his determination of the rent, the tenants claimed their interests were compromised, which position was not upheld in the instant case. However, in other cases, where there is provision for rent review but not at the option of the tenant, the Court has filled the void when the landlord does not cooperate in the review process.10 But where such right to review is conferred upon the landlord without obligation, such a review will not be held to be exercisable by both parties11.
The Court’s conclusions in this aspect are significant because it reveals the trend to set aside old existing notions, such as the strict adherence to determining the will of the contracting parties in arriving at its decisions and the viewing of the contract as being in the nature of an enforceable promise between the parties. Dispute Resolution Procedure at Rent Review.
* Bevans, Geoff and Shiraz, Oshidar, 2005. “Surveying the expert Witness domain.” New Law Journal, 155.7177(779)
* Day, Joanna, Page Joanna and LeGat, Louise, 2001. “Expert evidence under the CPR : A compendium of cases from April 1999 to 2001.” London: Sweet and Maxwell.
* Fried, Charles, 1982. “Contract as promise” Boston: Harvard University Press.
* Furst, David, 2007. “Management/Property: Partners in Property” Law Society Gazette, 104.06 (14)
* Part 35 of Civil procedure Rules, “Experts and Assessors.” [online] Available at: http://www.hrothgar.co.uk/YAWS/framecpr/part35.htm
* Practice Direction to Part 35 of CPR. [online] available at: http://www.dca.gov.uk/civil/procrules_fin/contents/practice_directions/pd_part35.htm
* Baron v Lovell (1999) CPLR 630 (Court of Appeal)
* Clonard Developments Ltd v Humberts (1999) ECGS 7 (Court of Appeal)
* Currys group Plc v Martin (1999) 3 EGLR 165 (Queen’s Bench Division)
* Epoch properties Limited v British Home Stores (Jersey) Ltd and the President of the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors.” 2004 JRC 092.
* Hemingway Realty Ltd v Master Wardens & Commonalty of Freemen of the Art or Mystery of Cloth workers of the City of London (2005) 19 EG 176 Ch. D
* Michael Hyde and Associates Ltd v JD Williams and co Ltd (2000) BLR 1999 (Court of Appeal)
* Morgan Sindall plc v Sawston Farms (Cambs) Ltd (1999) 1 EGLR 90
* Multimedia Productions Limited v The Secretary of State for the Environment (1988) EGSC 83
* Pride Valley Foods Ltd v Hall and Partners (Contract Management) (May 4, 2000) TCC
* Royal bank of Scotland plc v Jennings (1997) 19 EG 152
* Stevens v Gullis (1999) 3 EGLR 71 (Court of Appeal)
Please type your essay title, choose your document type, enter your email and we send you essay samples