Luttenberger v North Thoresby Farms Ltd
Language: English Series: Estates Gazette ; (1993) 17 EG 102-109(8)Publication details: 1993Subject(s): Summary: ChD 21 December 1992. Centres on the implications of expiry of a notice to quit under case D for non-payment of rent. The plaintiff (L) was freeholder of a farm tenanted by the first defendant (N). N was a company whose shares were owned by the second and third defendants. Rent was payable half-yearly. One month after a due date with no rent forthcoming L`s solicitor served notice to pay within two months. Payment was sent but with only one signature on the cheque. The cheque was eventually resubmitted with the additional signature. L sought an order for possession following expiry of the notice to quit. Held; that the order should be granted.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | ABS48660 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 67858-1001 |
ChD 21 December 1992. Centres on the implications of expiry of a notice to quit under case D for non-payment of rent. The plaintiff (L) was freeholder of a farm tenanted by the first defendant (N). N was a company whose shares were owned by the second and third defendants. Rent was payable half-yearly. One month after a due date with no rent forthcoming L`s solicitor served notice to pay within two months. Payment was sent but with only one signature on the cheque. The cheque was eventually resubmitted with the additional signature. L sought an order for possession following expiry of the notice to quit. Held; that the order should be granted.