Considers "Dogan v Semali Investments" ([2005] EWCA Civ 1036, [2005] 50 EG 92-97(6)defendant landlord (S) appealed against judege's decision under section 30(1)(f) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954. Under this section of the Act, a landlord can oppose renewal of a lease of business premises if it can show an intention to demolish, reconstruct or carry out extensive construction works. S had gained planning permission to carry out an extension to it's property. However this work was dependant on gaining access to the property via an agreement with an NHS trust. At the original trial these negotiations had broken down, and S produced expert evidence that stated that the scheme could go ahead in a limited manner without the access. The judge did not believe that the landlord had any intention to proceeding with the scheme and accordingly decided that the tenant should have a new lease. The CA disagreed with the judge, and that, he did not have proper regard for the expert evidence. In addition S had gained planning consent for the revised scheme.