[2004] EWCA (Civ) 100, 12 February 2004. The appellant landlord (L) appealed against a HC decision ([2002] EWHC 2769 (Ch), Abs66721) that a second counternotice served by the respondent tenant (T) satisfied the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 s29(2). The first counternotice, issued by T in response to L's notice under s29(2) of the Act for termination of his business tenancy, wrongly stated that T would be willing to vacate the property. Before the expiry of the two month time limit for service of a counternotice, T issued a second counternotice to rectify the mistake and then applied for the grant of a new tenancy. L was allowed to strike out the proceedings. The judge allowed T's appeal against the striking out of his application. L appealed. "Held" the appeal was allowed because it was not open to a tenant to serve a second counternotice. View judgment at www.bailii.org.