000			01636cam a2200229 4500
001			ABS66082
008			021025n2002 000 0 eng u
035			_a(Sirsi) u120259
245			_aYenula Properties Ltd v Naidu
260			_c2002
490			_aEstates Gazette _v[2002] 42 EG 162-168(7)
490			_aCourt of Appeal (Civil Division) _v[2002] EWCA Civ 719
520			_aCA 23 May 2002. Concerns a tenancy agreement dated 4 August 1995. The respondent landlord (Y) granted the appellant tenant (N) a tenancy of a flat. At issue was whether N's tenancy, as Y argued, was an assured shorthold tenancy by the service of a notice under the Housing Act 1988 s20. CC held that the tenancy was an assured shorthold tenancy, which had commenced on 1 August 1995, before the service of a s20 notice. Y's appeal was granted. The trial judge had been wrong to find that the tenancy had begun on 1 August, and made a declaration that N had been entitled to an assured shorthold tenancy starting 4 August. N appealed, contending inter alia, that a s20 notice, could not be served on an agent of the tenant. Appeal dismissed. View judgment on Court Service website http://www.courtservice.gov.uk/View.do?id=1197&searchTerm=Yenula&ascending=false&index=0&maxIndex=1
590			_aABS
650			_aASSURED SHORTHOLD TENANCIES
650			_aHOUSING ACT 1988 S20
650			_aYENULA PROPERTIES LTD V NAIDU
650			_aSECTION 20 NOTICES
690			_aLANDLORD AND TENANT-RESIDENTIAL TENANCIES-CASE LAW
856			_uhttps://www.courtservice.gov.uk/View.do?id=1197&searchTerm=Yenula&ascending=false&index=0&maxIndex=1
942			_n0
999			_c71443 _d71443