[2003] EWHC 3106 (Ch), 19 December 2003. Tenant (M) sought in 1997 to enfranchise a property comprising a main house and an associated mews house. HL ([2002] UKHL 49, Abs66268) decided that M was allowed to enfranchise the main house but not the mews house. Following a change in the law in 2002, M served notice on landlord (H) in 2003 to enfranchise the mews house and to limit the 1997 notice to the main house. H argued that, if it had been served in 1997 with the correct notice only referring to the main house, the mews house tenancy would have terminated at the contractual term date and would not have become enfranchiseable under the new law. H contended that the amendment of the 1997 notice was conditional on the 2003 notice being withdrawn. H appealed the judgment that the 1997 notice needed no amendment and that the mews house amendment was valid. "Held": dismissed - the effect of the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 Sched 3 Para 3(1) was that where a notice of enfranchisement was served, the tenancy of the whole of the property was continued including any part not referred to in the notice; that the 1997 notice would still have extended the mews house tenancy and the tenant's 2003 notice was valid even though the contractual term date had expired.