[2003] EWHC 1252 (Ch), 9 May 2003. Concerns the interpretation of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1927 s23 with regard to whether a s25 notice issued under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 Part II and sent by recorded delivery was deemed to have been served on the date the notice was issued rather than the date of receipt. In accordance with the 1954 Act s29(2), an application has to be made within four months of the service of the landlord's notice. The County Court held that tenant E's application for a new tenancy had been made just within the four-month period as the Landlord and Tenant Act 1927 s23, as extended by the Recorded Delivery Service Act 1962 and read with the Interpretation Act 1978 s7, had been complied with. On appeal by landlord (B), the HC held that under the 1927 Act s23, where a notice served under the 1954 Act s25 was sent through the post by recorded delivery to the addressee at his place of abode it was irrebuttably deemed to have been served, the service was deemed to have been made at the date that the notice had been served and not the date of actual receipt. The 1927 s23 was not subject to the Interpretation Act 1978 and it was not necessary to protect E's rights under the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms to change the ordinary meaning of s23 by applying the 1978 Act s7. Therefore E's application for a new tenancy was made outside the four-month time period. Appeal allowed. (See also Abs...).