000			01287cam a2200217 4500
001			WB3844-13
008			021125n2002 000 0 eng u
035			_a(Sirsi) u120573
245			_aSense made of service of notices
260			_c2002
490			_aEstates Gazette _v(0247) 23 November 2002, 145(1)
520			_aIn "W X Investments Ltd v Begg" [2002] EWHC 925 (Ch); [2002] 1 WLR 2849 a step has been taken to refuse to follow controversial ruling made in "Stephenson and Sons v Orca Properties Ltd" [1989] 44 EG 81, where no one had been available to sign for delivery of rent review notice, so it was judged that it had not been served. WX Investments case ruled that Law of Property Act 1925 ensures that service of notice sent by recorded delivery cannot be denied, except where it is returned by post. In such a case, notice is accepted as having been served on date when it would have been delivered by ordinary post, regardless of whether someone is available to sign for it.
590			_aWB
650			_aSERVING NOTICES
650			_aW X INVESTMENTS LTD V BEGG
650			_aLAW OF PROPERTY ACT 1925
650			_aSTEPHENSON AND SONS V ORCA PROPERTIES LTD
650			_aHOLWELL SECURITIES LTD V HUGHES
690			_aPROPERTY-LANDLORD AND TENANT
942			_n0
999			_c71631 _d71631