[2006] EWHC 2657 (Ch), 16 October 2006. Concerned a tenant's option to purchase the freehold reversion of a property giving a notice period of less than the three months required in the lease. The tenants' solicitors had exercised or purported to exercise the option to buy the freehold reversion of the premises on the terms set out in the lease. However, the actual terms of the notice sent by the tenants to the landlord gave the wrong date for expiry and that error was repeated in a second letter. The court had to consider whether, in accordance with the principle set out in "Mannai Investment Co Ltd v Eagle Star Assurance" ((1997) AC 749, [1997] 1 EGLR 57), the notice was sufficiently clear and unambiguous so as to leave the landlord in no doubt as to how and when it was intended to operate. "Held": it was decided that the notice was invalid, not being sufficiently clear and unambiguous so as to have left a reasonable recipient, with the requisite knowledge, in no doubt as to its terms.