CASENOTES - Fitzkriston LLP v Panayi - Best Rents, Parol leases and Law of Property Act 1925 Section 54(2)

James Brown

CASENOTES - Fitzkriston LLP v Panayi - Best Rents, Parol leases and Law of Property Act 1925 Section 54(2)

Research output: Contribution to journal › Letter, comment/opinion or interview › peer-review

Abstract

Casenote considers nature of ruling in Fitzkriston v Panayi and its implications for the interpretation of S.54(2) Law of Property Act 1925

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	54
Journal	Conveyancer and Property Lawyer
Issue number	1
Publication status	Published - 2009

Cite this

@article{173c20d7cd5e42c69d97ae6068c6d588,

title = "CASENOTES - Fitzkriston LLP v Panayi - Best Rents, Parol leases and Law of Property Act 1925 Section 54(2)",

abstract = "Casenote considers nature of ruling in Fitzkriston v Panayi and its implications for the interpretation of S.54(2) Law of Property Act 1925",

author = "James Brown",

year = "2009",

language = "English",

pages = "54",

journal = "Conveyancer and Property Lawyer",

issn = "0010-8200",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - CASENOTES - Fitzkriston LLP v Panayi - Best Rents, Parol leases and Law of Property Act 1925 Section 54(2)

AU - Brown, James

PY - 2009

Y1 - 2009

N2 - Casenote considers nature of ruling in Fitzkriston v Panayi and its implications for the interpretation of S.54(2) Law of Property Act 1925

AB - Casenote considers nature of ruling in Fitzkriston v Panayi and its implications for the interpretation of S.54(2) Law of Property Act 1925

M3 - Letter, comment/opinion or interview

SN - 0010-8200

SP - 54

JO - Conveyancer and Property Lawyer

JF - Conveyancer and Property Lawyer

IS - 1

ER -

CASENOTES - Fitzkriston LLP v Panayi - Best Rents, Parol leases and Law of Property Act 1925 Section 54(2)

Abstract

Fingerprint

Cite this