0
HHJ Gerald, Central London County Court
The Claimant was the tenant of a long lease of a flat in a building owned by the Respondent Council. The tenant served a s42 notice claiming a lease extension. It contended that the counter-notice served by the landlord was invalid because it did not state that it was also served on behalf of the intermediate landlord, or give the name of that landlord, as required by a schedule to the 1993 Act. This was an appeal against a decision in favour of the landlord. The appeal was dismissed on the basis that a failure to comply with this requirement did not invalidate the counter-notice as it was not essential to the working of the statutory scheme.
Tom Jefferies acted for the successful Respondent.
