St Ermins Property Co v Tingay
St Ermins Property Co v Tingay
- 2002
- Estates Gazette Law Reports [2002] 40 EG 174-177(4) High Court (Administrative Court) [2002] EWHC 1673 (Ch) .
ChD 19 July 2002. The appellant tenant (T) held a lease of a flat owned by the respondent landlord (S). In October 2000, a notice was served on the landlord, under the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 s 42, claiming a new extended lease of the flat. T's son, acting under power of attorney given in 1998 signed the notice. S served a counternotice, contending that the initial notice was invalid on the ground, inter alia, that the notice was not signed in the correct form. The judge held the notice was invalid. T appealed. "Held", the appeal was dismissed.
LEASEHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT
LEASEHOLD REFORM
LEASEHOLD REFORM, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT ACT 1993 S42
PERSONAL SIGNATURE
ST ERMINS PROPERTY CO V TINGAY
ChD 19 July 2002. The appellant tenant (T) held a lease of a flat owned by the respondent landlord (S). In October 2000, a notice was served on the landlord, under the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 s 42, claiming a new extended lease of the flat. T's son, acting under power of attorney given in 1998 signed the notice. S served a counternotice, contending that the initial notice was invalid on the ground, inter alia, that the notice was not signed in the correct form. The judge held the notice was invalid. T appealed. "Held", the appeal was dismissed.
LEASEHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT
LEASEHOLD REFORM
LEASEHOLD REFORM, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT ACT 1993 S42
PERSONAL SIGNATURE
ST ERMINS PROPERTY CO V TINGAY