Hough v Greathall Ltd [2015] EWCA Civ 23 (27 January 2015)

Hough v Greathall Ltd [2015] EWCA Civ 23 (27 January 2015)

The relevant date for establishing a landlord's intention to redevelop under section 30(1)(f) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 is the date of the hearing, not the date of service of the section 25 notice. The change in statutory wording following the abolition of the counter-notice procedure did not alter this settled principle.

Citation
[2015] EWCA Civ 23
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Richard Hough; Defendant/respondent: Greathall Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 January 2015
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil) / Appeal From Croydon County Court Decision Dismissing Application for New Tenancy and Ordering Possession
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Security of Tenure, Business Tenancies, Opposition to New Tenancy, Landlord's Intention to Redevelop, Interpretation of Landlord and Tenant Act 1954

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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Richard Hough

Claimant/appellant

Greathall Limited

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil) / Appeal From Croydon County Court Decision Dismissing Application for New Tenancy and Ordering Possession

  1. 1 What is the relevant date for establishing a landlord's intention to redevelop under section 30(1)(f) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954?
  2. 2 Does the amended wording of section 25(6) and (7) of the Act change the timing for proving intention compared to section 26(6)?

Ratio Decidendi

The relevant date for establishing a landlord's intention to redevelop under section 30(1)(f) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 is the date of the hearing, not the date of service of the section 25 notice. The change in statutory wording following the abolition of the counter-notice procedure did not alter this settled principle.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Order of Croydon County Court affirmed
  • Claimant not entitled to a new tenancy