header-logo header-logo

03 June 2016
Issue: 7701 / Categories: Case law , Judicial line , In Court
printer mail-detail

Unwelcome x 2

If an assured shorthold tenancy contains a break clause exercisable by the landlord by notice, is it sufficient for the landlord simply to give the tenant notice under s 21 of the Housing Act 1988 which omits any reference to the contractual term?

A s 21 notice alone has the potential to rank as an effective notice under the break clause so long as all the requirements of the break clause are satisfied by it and so a careful consideration of what it provides for would be needed. If, for example, the break clause can only be exercised in the event of a specified contractual breach by the tenant then it may be that a bare s 21 notice will not be sufficient to perform the dual role. It should be noted that in relation to an assured shorthold tenancy granted on or after 1 October 2015 landlords cannot give a section 21 notice within the first four months of the term and they must follow up giving a section 21 notice with the commencement of a county court claim for possession within six months.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll