Click the case name for better results:

Bridgers and Hamptons Residential v Stanford: CA 1991

The court considered a notice which did not comply with section 25 in several respects. One defect was that it did not comply with 25(5) since it only required the tenants to notify the landlord if they were not willing to give up possession: it required the tenants to give a negative counter notice but … Continue reading Bridgers and Hamptons Residential v Stanford: CA 1991

Scott v Southern Pacific Mortgages Ltd and Others: SC 22 Oct 2014

The appellant challenged a sale and rent back transaction. He said that the proposed purchaser had misrepresented the transaction to them. The Court was asked s whether the home owners had interests whose priority was protected by virtue of section 29(2)(a)(ii) of, and Schedule 3, paragraph 2, to the Land Registration Act 2002. Held: The … Continue reading Scott v Southern Pacific Mortgages Ltd and Others: SC 22 Oct 2014

Beanby Estates Ltd v The Egg Stores (Stamford Hill) Ltd: ChD 9 May 2003

The parties disputed whether a tenant’s counter-notice had been served within the time limit applicable. It was out of time if the time ran from the date of posting of the landlord’s notice, but not if timed from the date of receipt. Held: The Landlord’s appeal succeeded. Judges: Neuberger J Citations: [2003] EWHC 1252 (Ch), … Continue reading Beanby Estates Ltd v The Egg Stores (Stamford Hill) Ltd: ChD 9 May 2003