Home Information Cases Pennycook v Shaws (EAL) Ltd (2004)

Skip to content. | Skip to navigation

Navigation
 

Pennycook v Shaws (EAL) Ltd (2004)

Summary

The appellant landlord (L) appealed against a decision that a second counternotice served by the respondent tenant (T) satisfied s.29(2) Landlord and Tenant Act 1954.

Facts

The first counternotice, issued by T in response to L's notice under s.25 of the Act for termination of his business tenancy, erroneously stated that T would be willing to give up possession of the property.   The error was noticed before the time for serving a counternotice had expired.   T consequently served a negative counternotice and then applied for the grant of a new tenancy.   L successfully applied to strike out proceedings.   The judge allowed T's appeal against the striking out of his application.   L submitted that the judge was not entitled to depart from the reasoning in Re 14 Grafton Street [1971] 1 Ch 935.   T argued that the decision in that case violated his rights under Art.6 and Protocol 1 Art.1 of the European Convention on Human Rights

Held

The Court of Appeal reversed Pumfrey J's decision that a tenant could serve a negative counter-notice following the service of a positive counter-notice, provided it was within 2 months of the landlord's s.25 notice.   The Court of Appeal held that Art 1 of the first protocol was engaged but that the measure was proportionate and did not violate the Human Rights Act

Court of Appeal
Thorpe LJ, Arden LJ, Sir Martin Nourse
Judgment date
12 February 2004
References

[2004] EWCA Civ 100 : [2004] Ch 296 :[2004]2 All ER 665

Practice areas