Notice to quit for subletting
Language: English Series: EGCS ; 1989 113Publication details: 1989Subject(s): Summary: The landlord sought a declaration that the counternotice in reply to a notice to quit for subletting in breach of the tenancy agreement was invalid. The tenant was able to demonstrate that the notice to quit in accordance with Agricultural Holdings Act 1986 Schedule 3 Case E and s26(2) was invalid as he had correspondence from the landlord agreeing to the subletting of the cottages. The case was Lord Rous (Earl of Stradbroke) v Mitchell ChD 14 July 1989.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| News article | London News article | WB2530-15 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 4473-1001 |
Browsing London shelves, Shelving location: News article Close shelf browser (Hides shelf browser)
The landlord sought a declaration that the counternotice in reply to a notice to quit for subletting in breach of the tenancy agreement was invalid. The tenant was able to demonstrate that the notice to quit in accordance with Agricultural Holdings Act 1986 Schedule 3 Case E and s26(2) was invalid as he had correspondence from the landlord agreeing to the subletting of the cottages. The case was Lord Rous (Earl of Stradbroke) v Mitchell ChD 14 July 1989.