header-logo header-logo

Section 146: a modern interpretation

29 May 2019 / Charles Auld , Kate Harrington
Issue: 7842 / Categories: Features , Property , Landlord&tenant
printer mail-detail

Charles Auld & Kate Harrington trace the introduction, construction & interpretation of s 146 notices

  • The Victorians considered that a landlord should not re-enter without a warning notice being given to the tenant.
  • A section 146 notice served before the landlord’s right to re-enter has arisen is of no effect.

In Victorian times a landlord could forfeit a lease for failure to repair without giving the tenant any warning that he was going to do so. Of course, there was no reason why the parties to a lease could not agree provisions that required the landlord to give due warning before re-entering the premises and terminating the lease. However, it seems that few did so. Accordingly, Parliament intervened and enacted s 14 of the Conveyancing Act 1881, the relevant parts of which provided that ‘a right of re-entry or forfeiture shall not be enforceable by action or otherwise, unless and until the lessor serves on the lessee a notice specifying the particular breach complained of

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

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll