Landlord and tenant – Abatement notice – Specific implement. Sheriff Appeal Court: Refusing an appeal in an action in which the pursuer, the landlord of premises occupied as tenant by the defender, and used by him as a takeaway restaurant, sought, inter alia, declarator that the defender was obliged in terms of the lease to carry out, at his expense, works required by an abatement notice which the local authority had served on the pursuer in respect of statutory nuisance caused by noise from the premises, the court rejected the defender's contention that the sheriff had erred in allowing proof because the pursuer's first two craves did not specify with the required precision what works he must carry out and were therefore irrelevant and/or lacking in specification—there was sufficient specification to allow the matter to proceed to proof; nor had the sheriff erred in dismissing the counterclaim as it was clear that there was no binding agreement reached in an exchange of letters.