Please sign in with your existing account details.
Register to access exclusive content, sign up to receive our updates and personalise your experience on brownejacobson.com.
Privacy statement - Terms and conditions
Forgotten your password?
You have exceeded the maximum number of login attempts for this email address and your account has been locked. An email has been sent to member of Browne Jacobson's web team and some one will be contacting you over the next two working days with details of how to change your password.
Are you sure you want to remove this item from you pinned content?
In Siemens Hearing Instruments Ltd v Friends Life Ltd (2013) the High Court considered whether a break notice, which did not comply with the provisions set out in the lease, was effective to trigger a break clause.
The tenant served notice on the landlord to initiate a break clause in the lease. The lease provided such notice must state it was given under section 24(2) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954. The notice failed to do so and was considered by the landlord as invalid.
The court acknowledged the clause in the lease was clear and therefore the notice did not comply. However the clause did not provide that non-compliance would automatically render the notice invalid or ineffective; accordingly the court held the particular non-compliance was not fatal and the notice deemed valid.
This decision is useful when considering if a notice which does not comply with the terms of a lease or a statutory provision can still be considered to be valid and effective.
Break rights have proved a fertile source of litigation over the last few years. More often than not, tenants have found themselves on the wrong end of the decisions. However, a Court of Appeal decision yesterday has bucked that trend.
View blog
One of the requirements for tenants to contract out of the security of tenure regime contained in the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 is that they make a simple or statutory declaration before entering into the lease.
Landlords should reconsider summary judgment if a Part 26A restructuring plan is pending.
A landlord’s claim for summary judgment to recover rent and service charge arrears accrued since the start of the pandemic against a non-essential retailer succeeded. Like London buses, a second such case has followed hot on its heels.
Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.
Sign up