The tenant had a lease of business premises. The premises were damaged in a terrorist attack, and the landlord served a notice terminating the lease. The lease gave the right to the landlord to determine the lease if the property was incapable of occupation for more than six months. It came to be accepted that the property was not fit for occupation. The tenant said he had not been served with the notice, not having actually received or seen any of the notices.
Held: Hard as it may be the landlord had complied with the statutory requirements, and those in the lease. Notice is not the same as knowledge. The notices served by post were effective. A notice attached to the outside of a building from which the tenant had been excluded might not be adequate. The words of the statute were clear and simple, and should not be complicated. Though in occasional cases this might lead to unfair advantage, the statute must be applied.
Judges:
Lord Justice Schiemann Lord Justice Robert Walker And Lord Justice Carnwath
Citations:
[2002] EWCA Civ 573, [2002] 2 EGLR 29, [2002] PL SCS 112
Links:
Statutes:
Law of Property Act 1925 196, Interpretation Act 1978 7, Landlord and Tenant Act 1927 23(1)
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Galinski v McHugh 5-Oct-1988
A landlord’s notice under section 4 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 had been served on the tenant’s solicitors, who had confirmed that they had authority to accept service. Later the tenant challenged the validity of the service.
Held: . .
Cited – Scholl Manufacturing Co Ltd v Clifton (Slim-Line) Ltd CA 1967
The question was whether a landlord could exercise a right to break a lease by serving a notice under section 25 of the Act, which provides for termination of a tenancy by the landlord.
Held: If a notice is served on an occupying tenant in . .
Cited – National Westminster Bank Ltd v Betchworth Investments Ltd CA 1975
The court considered service of a notice at a lessee’s last known address. The landlord’s notice exercising its right under the break clause was sent to an address which ‘was no longer in existence; the building had been demolished; and the envelope . .
Cited by:
Cited – Beanby Estates Ltd v Egg Stores (Stamford Hill) Ltd ChD 9-May-2003
The landlord had served a notice under the 1954 Act. The tenant served a counter notice, but the question was whether he was late, or out of time.
Held: The combination of the various provisions meant that the landlord’s notice had irrevocably . .
Cited – C A Webber (Transport) Ltd v Railtrack plc CA 15-Jul-2003
A notice served under s25 of the 1954 Act, being sent by recorded delivery to the tenant at its place of abode, was irrebuttably deemed to have been served on the day it was posted. Section 23 of the 1927 Act operated to disapply section 7 of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Landlord and Tenant
Updated: 02 September 2022; Ref: scu.170227