Notting Hill Housing Trust v Roomus: CA 29 Mar 2006

The landlord had served a notice to quit on his tenant. The notice specified that possession would be required ‘at the end of your period of your tenancy’ It was objected that the notice was ineffective.
Held: The notice must be interpreted to refer to the time immediately after the tenancy came to an end, and not to the split second when the tenacy was expiring. It was effective.


Mr Justice Dyson Lord Justice Mummery Sir Martin Nourse


[2006] EWCA Civ 407, Times 01-Apr-2006, [2006] 1 WLR 1375




Housing Act 1988 21(4)


England and Wales


CitedLower Street Properties Ltd v Jones CA 1986
The tenant complained both that her tenancy was a periodic assured tenancy acquired on succession, and that the termination notice given to her was invalid. LSP had granted an assured shorthold tenancy to C, and J was her statutory successor. The . .
CitedMcDonald and Another v Fernandez and Another CA 19-Jul-2003
The landlord served a notice to terminate a shorthold tenancy saying that he required possession on a certain day. The tenancy had been a periodic tenancy, and the date was not the last day of a period of the tenancy.
Held: The Act was . .
CitedMannai Investment Co Ltd v Eagle Star Assurance HL 21-May-1997
Minor Irregularity in Break Notice Not Fatal
Leases contained clauses allowing the tenant to break the lease by serving not less than six months notice to expire on the third anniversary of the commencement date of the term of the lease. The tenant gave notice to determine the leases on 12th . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.241395