Not absolutely evident
Not absolutely evident
- 2002
- Estates Gazette (0210) 9 March 2003, 154(1) .
The third in a series of four articles on statutory notices discusses the issue of 'evident error' and emphasises the importance of statutory requirements. Examines the recent case "Burman v Mount Cook Land Ltd " where the Court of Appeal had to consider whether a landlord's counternotice under the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 s45 had been valid. For the case see Abs63736.
EVIDENT ERROR
LEASEHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT
LEASES
BURWELL V MOUNT COOK LAND LTD
LEASEHOLD REFORM, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT ACT 1993 S45
MANNAI INVESTMENT CO LTD V EAGLE STAR LIFE ASSURANCE CO LTD UK
SPEEDWELL ESTATES LTD AND ANOTHER V DALZIEL AND OTHERS
COUNTERNOTICES
The third in a series of four articles on statutory notices discusses the issue of 'evident error' and emphasises the importance of statutory requirements. Examines the recent case "Burman v Mount Cook Land Ltd " where the Court of Appeal had to consider whether a landlord's counternotice under the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 s45 had been valid. For the case see Abs63736.
EVIDENT ERROR
LEASEHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT
LEASES
BURWELL V MOUNT COOK LAND LTD
LEASEHOLD REFORM, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT ACT 1993 S45
MANNAI INVESTMENT CO LTD V EAGLE STAR LIFE ASSURANCE CO LTD UK
SPEEDWELL ESTATES LTD AND ANOTHER V DALZIEL AND OTHERS
COUNTERNOTICES