Q&As

Does a section 21 notice give the required two months' notice if it is served on the 20th of the first month, and requires possession after the 19th of the third month?

read titleRead full title
Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
Published by a LexisNexis Property Disputes expert
Published on: 10 May 2024
imgtext

Section 21(1) of the Housing Act 1988 provides that the court shall make an order for possession of a property let on an assured shorthold tenancy if, among other things, the 'landlord or, in the case of joint landlords, at least one of them has given to the tenant not less than two

Powered by Lexis+®
Jurisdiction(s):
United Kingdom

Popular documents

Can a tenant retract a notice to quit previously served to exercise a break clause in an assured

Can a tenant retract a notice to quit previously served to exercise a break clause in an assured shorthold tenancy before expiry of the notice?Whether a notice to quit can be retractedThere is various authority for the position that a notice to quit, once it has been served, cannot be

Does a notice to quit expire? Possession proceedings must be brought within 12 months of serving a

Does a notice to quit expire? Possession proceedings must be brought within 12 months of serving a section 8 notice, but is the same applicable to possession proceedings for a notice to quit?This Q&A considers the nature of a notice to quit served in respect of a tenancy which does not have the

Common law tenancies

Common law tenanciesCommon law tenancies are tenancies that do not fall within any of the statutory security of tenure regimes. These include, for example:•for residential property, the Rent Act 1977, Housing Act 1985 or Housing Act 1988 (see Practice Note: A summary of types of private residential

What is the difference between an appeal and a review?

What is the difference between an appeal and a review?What is an appeal?An appeal in insolvency proceedings is no different to an appeal in normal litigation. An appeal will be allowed only if the appeal court is satisfied that the decision of the lower court was 'wrong' or 'unjust because of a