Platt and Others v London Underground Ltd
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 21 February 2001 |
| Date | 21 February 2001 |
| Court | Chancery Division |
Chancery Division
Before Mr Justice Neuberger.
Landlord and tenant - damages due for derogation from grant - court could offset increased profit against damages
Where a landlord leased two business premises to the same tenant and wrongfully restricted access by members of the public to the first but in so doing increased the trade of the second, the court was permitted to take into account the increased profits of the second premises when assessing damages for derogation from grant of the first.
Mr Justice Neuberger so held in the Chancery Division when finding that the defendants, London Underground Ltd, had acted in derogation from grant by operating their underground station in such as way as to deprive the claimants, Andrew Campbell Platt, Chantana Potchapornkul and 7 Day Change Ltd, of trade.
Miss Catherine Taskis for the claimants; Mr Richard Harrison for the defendant.
MR JUSTICE NEUBERGER said that the defendant's underground station at Goodge Street had two doors both on the west side of Tottenham Court Road: the first was for passengers entering or leaving the station, while the second was accessible only to passengers who were leaving.
Inside both doors there was a kiosk. The defendant let the two kiosks to the claimants under separate leases on January 21, 1991.
The kiosk by the first door was let as a bureau de change and that at the second for the sale of food and drinks.
The claimants contended that they were unable to trade successfully from the kiosk by the second door owing to the fact that the defendant denied passengers leaving the station access through that exit for a large proportion of the period that the station was open.
The claimants contended that by not operating the exit the defendants had acted in derogation from grant and that they were entitled to damages.
On the facts, his Lordship held that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Square Management Ltd v Dunnes Stores Dublin Company
...enforceable against the grantor's land.' (para.67) 56 He also considered in detail the decision of the English High Court in Platt v. London Underground Ltd [2001] 2 E.G.L.R. 121 and considered 11 principles set forth by Neuberger J. in that judgment. 57 At paragraph 71, Barrett J. states:......
-
The Honourable Ivor Edward Other Windsor-Clive, Earl of Plymouth v Jenkin Thomas Rees
...be so construed, it will be rejected as being repugnant to the demise. Some relevant principles were set out by Neuberger J in Platt v London Underground Ltd [2001] 2 EGLR 121: “1. It is well established that a landlord, like any grantor, cannot derogate from his grant. To put it in more n......
-
S Franses Ltd v The Cavendish Hotel (London) Ltd
...be answered just by construing the clause: it is a question of construing the clause in the light of the grant. 99 In Platt v LUL Ltd [2001] 2 EGLR 121, Neuberger J helpfully brought together the principles on derogation from grant in the context of the reservation of a right of entry. In m......
-
Gloucester Place Music Ltd v Simon Le Bon and Others
...law). Non-derogation from grant 29 The law concerning the doctrine of non-derogation from grant was summarised by Neuberger J in Platt v London Underground Ltd [2001] 2 EGLR 121 at 122 as follows: "1. It is well established that a landlord, like any grantor, cannot derogate from his grant. ......