000			01656cab a2200241 4500
001			ABS50487
008			090401t1994 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u76103
041			_aeng
245			_aHannaford v Smallacombe
260			_c1994
350			_a0
490			_aEstates Gazette _v1994 15 EG 155-158(4)
520			_aCA 16 December 1993. Respondent tenant H and appellant landlord S agreed to go to arbitration over a notice to quit issued under Agricultural Holdings Act 1986 sch3 case D. Arbitrator accepted appointment subject to completion of form of appointment by both parties. Arbitrator acknowledged notices on 18 September reminding both parties that their statements must be received within 35 days under para 7 Sched 11 of 1986 Act. Agreement between the parties was made on 12 September and was received by arbitrator on 14 September. On 19 October, the arbitrator informed tenant`s solicitor that as no evidence had been submitted by his client within the 35 days, he was time-barred. H argued that the 35 days ran from 18 September or the time period could be extended at the arbitrator`s discretion. CC decided in J`s favour. CA overturned CC ruling holding that H had not submitted his evidence within the time limit and found that S had correctly issued the notice to quit. Appeal allowed.
650			_aAGRICULTURAL HOLDINGS ACT 1986
650			_aPROPERTY-LANDLORD AND TENANT-TENANCIES-AGRICULTURAL TENANCIES
650			_aNOTICE TO QUIT
650			_aTERMINATION OF TENANCY
650			_aTIME LIMITS
690			_aLANDLORD AND TENANT-CASE LAW-AGRICULTURAL TENANCIES
942			_n0
948			_c04/03/1997
999			_c47884 _d47884