Divall v Harrison and another
Divall v Harrison and another
- 1992
- Estates Gazette (1992) 38 EG 149-152(2) .
CA 21 February 1992. Letters were issued by the executors of a landlord`s will to terminate H`s annual tenancy. D, the plaintiff, was the residual beneficiary of that will, on whose behalf the notices were served in accordance with the specified time limit. However, H served a counter notice under the terms of the Agricultural Holdings Act 1986. In court at the first instance, the notices to quit were accepted as valid, so the tenant appealed arguing that the plaintiff was not at that stage the landlord. This was accepted at the Court of Appeal, the landlord not having been correctly identified in the notice.
QUIT NOTICES
CA 21 February 1992. Letters were issued by the executors of a landlord`s will to terminate H`s annual tenancy. D, the plaintiff, was the residual beneficiary of that will, on whose behalf the notices were served in accordance with the specified time limit. However, H served a counter notice under the terms of the Agricultural Holdings Act 1986. In court at the first instance, the notices to quit were accepted as valid, so the tenant appealed arguing that the plaintiff was not at that stage the landlord. This was accepted at the Court of Appeal, the landlord not having been correctly identified in the notice.
QUIT NOTICES