The necessity for attornment was abolished by an act of 1705. In mortgages, an attornment clause is a clause whereby the mortgagor attorns tenant to the mortgagee, thus giving the mortgagee the right to distrain, as an additional security. As used in modern legal transactions, the term attornment refers to an acknowledgment of the existence of the relationship of landlord and tenant. A tenant often has the duty under the tenant's lease, particularly in commercial leases, to provide an attornment upon request, and is required by a creditor or potential buyer of property from the landlord to establish the nature of existing encumbrances on and income streams flowing from a property, as an element of the due diligence process associated with the transaction.
|
|
Frequently, a tenant must declare the existence of any outstanding disputes with the landlord at the time the attornment is executed and waives any dispute not declared at that time. A request for an attornment from a tenant which is refused can be used by a landlord as a basis for establishing grounds for eviction on the grounds of insecurity that the lease will be honored, or the existence of an actual case or controversy suitable for resolution in a declaratory judgment action. Attornment in commercial real estate is generally used in the context of a subordination, non-disturbance and attornment agreement (SNDA), which protects both the tenant and the lender in the event the landlord defaults on its commercial lending obligations. The lease remains in full force and effect.
|
|
Attornment (from French tourner, "to turn"), in English real property law, is the acknowledgment of a new lord by the tenant on the alienation of land. Under the feudal system, the relations of landlord and tenant were to a certain extent reciprocal. So it was considered unreasonable to the tenant to subject him to a new lord without his own approval, and it thus came about that alienation could not take place without the consent of the tenant. Attornment was also extended to all cases of lessees for life or for years.
|
|
Assissi Attornment Hospital is just one or two minutes walk from the junction. A three-minute walk from junction towards north, a cashew factory is there. Previously it was under the Dalmia Management. The local name for the company was 'Sayippinte Company'.
|
|
He was born approximately around 1180, his father was Obizzo II. He started his diplomatic career in 1198 when he himself confirmed the attornment of the knolls of the “Court of Gondola” to the city of Piacenza. The juridical procedures needed for this attornment had started to be composed years before by his uncles Alberto Malaspina and Morroello Malaspina. His diplomatic career hence began under the supervision of his uncles, who, until he turned 18, were acting in his name, he also worked alongside his cousins, they were tied by their common ancestor, the marques Obizzo I. In the period they worked together they had an intense diplomatic activity trying to solve the contrasts that arose with the Count-Bishop of the diocese of “Luni”, consequentially they signed agreements with the cities of Genoa, Milan, Piacenza, Tortona and Modena.
|
|
Given that it was "M" who delivered the car, it was necessary for Santam to prove that there had been some form of attornment, a tripartite agreement between Santam, the panelbeater and "M" to the effect that, although the panelbeater had formerly held for "M," it would thereafter hold for Santam. There was, however, no attempt to prove such an attornment; accordingly, the attempt to establish possession prior to 5 July had to fail. The court held further, with respect to the requirement that the possession upon which reliance was placed had to have been lawfully acquired, that this caused a further problem for the insurance company: It was difficult to understand what right Santam had to take possession of the car, or for that matter what right the panelbeater had to surrender it to Santam. An enrichment lien, the court noted, could not exist in vacuo; it served merely to strengthen an underlying cause of action based on unjust enrichment.
|
|
Justice La Forest wrote the unanimous reasons of court for dismissing the appeal. After surveying the case law in both England and the United States he noted that the old common law rules, based on territoriality, sovereignty, independence and attornment, were outdated. La Forest argued that a modern approach based on the principle of comity ("the deference and respect due by other states to the actions of a state legitimately taken within its territory") and reciprocity were needed a basis of recognizing foreign judgments. The infringement on the nation's sovereignty is justified where there is mutual convenience between states.
|
|
Earthcott Green), with the hundred and frankpledge of > Langele, (i.e. Langley) co. Gloucester, held in chief, and of the remainder > of the third part of the premises, likewise held in chief, after the death > of Margaret, the wife of John Kemys, who with her said husband, holds the > same in dower. Licence also for the said feoffees, after having had seisin > and received the attornment of the said John Kemys and Margaret to refeoff > the said Maurice and Alice, his wife, and the heirs of their bodies of the > said two parts, and to grant them the said remainder under the same entail, > with remainder to the right heirs of the said Maurice.
|
|