- Can I estopp you there? Deadlines under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 and the role of estoppel
- The 1954 Act
- What is estoppel?
- The Facts
- The decision
- Practical Considerations
Property Disputes analysis: James Walters of Irwin Mitchell LLP summarises the case of Siddiqui and Ullah v Rahman (acting by LPA receivers) in which it was found that a section 26 notice was validly served despite referring to property not expressly mentioned in the relevant lease, and that the receivers were not estopped from arguing that the s 26 notice was valid despite their initial assertion that it may not be valid. Accordingly, the tenants lost their right to a renewal lease when they failed to issue proceedings before the statutory deadline created by the s 26 notice.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial