000			01875cab a22002295a 4500
001			L139740
008			070807e20070323xxk f w 000 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u139740
041	0		_aeng
245	0	0	_aGlen International Ltd V Triplerose Ltd _h[electronic resource]
260			_c2007
520			_a[2007] EWCA Civ 388, 23 March 2007. The landlord (T) appealed against a decision that the tenant (G) had properly served a notice under the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1987 s42; and against an order granting G a new lease of the property. G believed that T had supplied no address for service under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 s48 and so served their notice to the address contained in T's demands for rent. In the absence of any counter-notice, the judge had ordered a new lease granted to G. During negotiations with G's solicitors regarding dilapidations, T's agent had supplied a separate address for correspondence. The issue was whether G ought to have served the notice for a new lease at that address or whether the address used amounted to proper service. "Held": T's agent had not supplied notice pursuant to the 1987 Act and G's solicitors did not have authority to receive the address as a proper service. They were authorised only to correspond regarding dilapidations. Appeal dismissed.
590			_aKA
650	2	4	_aGLEN INTERNATIONAL LTD V TRIPLEROSE LTD
650	2	4	_aLEASEHOLD REFORM, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT ACT 1993
650	2	4	_aLANDLORD AND TENANT ACT 1987 S48
650	2	4	_aSAFFRON WALDON SECOND BENEFIT BUILDING SOCIETY V RAYNER
651		4	_aEngland and Wales _y1543-
690			_aPROPERTY-COMMERCIAL PROPERTY-COMMERCIAL LANDLORD AND TENANT-COMMERCIAL LEASES
856	4	0	_uhttps://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2007/388.html _zView the judgement free of charge at www.bailii.org...
942			_n0
999			_c79077 _d79077