CA 22 May 2001. The appellants (B) were the owners of the reversion to a long lease held by the respondent tenant (W). Clause 5 of the lease stated that during the lease, that if the tenant wanted to assign the lease, it should be first offered to the landlord, including the price at which it would sell. If there was no response from the landlord within 21 days, the assignment could then proceed to an approved assignee at an ecquivalent, or higher price than offered to the landlord. On 28 October 1997, following an offer to purchase in the open market value at £1.7m W offered to sell the term to the landlord for the same price. On 18 November 1997 B stated they wished to exercise that right and that carpets and other matters should be included in the sale. By January 1998 W was arguing that there was no binding contract between the parties because, "inter alia", the two letters of 28 October and 18 November did not fulfil the Law of Property(Miscellaneous Provisions) 1989 s2. The Vice Chancellor concluded that the two letters did not satisfy s2 of the 1989 Act. B's appeal dismissed.