Baglarbasi and another v Deedmethod Ltd
Language: English Series: Estates Gazette ; (1991) 29 EG 137-145(5)Publication details: 1991Subject(s): Summary: ChD 14 December 1990. Concerns the validity of a section 25 notice, which the tenants claimed was invalid as the landlords had already forfeited the lease and that according to Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 s25(5) the notice must require the tenant to serve a counternotice; in this case no counternotice was required. The court rejected such a literal interpretation of section 25 and made an order for possession to the landlords.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | ABS45006 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 50320-1001 |
ChD 14 December 1990. Concerns the validity of a section 25 notice, which the tenants claimed was invalid as the landlords had already forfeited the lease and that according to Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 s25(5) the notice must require the tenant to serve a counternotice; in this case no counternotice was required. The court rejected such a literal interpretation of section 25 and made an order for possession to the landlords.