Lancecrest Ltd. v Asiwaju

Lancecrest Ltd. v Asiwaju

The landlord's late trigger notice was valid because time was not of the essence for service under the lease, and the tenant's letter, though disputing the validity of the notice, was sufficient to constitute a valid counter-notice as it objectively indicated non-acceptance of the proposed rent.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Lancecrest Limited; Defendant/appellant: Dr Ganiyu Asiwaju
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 February 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Bow County Court Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed on the validity of the trigger notice; appeal allowed on the validity of the counter-notice.
Legal Topics
Rent Review, Validity of Notices, Interpretation of Lease Clauses, Time of the Essence, Counter Notice Requirements
Landlord and Tenant Contract Law Rent Review Validity of Notices Interpretation of Lease Clauses Time of the Essence Counter Notice Requirements

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lancecrest Limited

Claimant/respondent

Dr Ganiyu Asiwaju

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Bow County Court Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the landlord's late rent review trigger notice was valid under the lease
  2. 2 Whether the tenant's letter constituted a valid counter-notice under the lease

Ratio Decidendi

The landlord's late trigger notice was valid because time was not of the essence for service under the lease, and the tenant's letter, though disputing the validity of the notice, was sufficient to constitute a valid counter-notice as it objectively indicated non-acceptance of the proposed rent.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed on the validity of the trigger notice; appeal allowed on the validity of the counter-notice.

Orders

  • Paragraph 1 of the order of Mr Recorder Hooper QC dated 27th February 2004 is set aside.
  • Agreed order for the payment of the costs of the appeal.