Invalid Section 25 Notice: Why Service Still Matters

A recent High Court decision in Lamba (t/a Smart Move Residential Sale and Lettings) v Enfield LBC is a useful reminder that how a notice is served can be just as important as what it says.

The case involved a business tenancy protected by the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954. The landlord served a section 25 notice to end the tenancy. However, the tenant later argued he had never received it and that the tenancy had not been validly terminated.

The key issue was the lease wording. It stated that section 196 of the Law of Property Act 1925 “shall apply” to service of notices. Under that provision, if a notice sent by registered or recorded delivery is returned undelivered, service is not effective.

In this case, the notice was sent by special delivery but was returned. There was no clear evidence it had been properly served by another method, and the tenant had not received it. The court decided the notice was invalid, meaning the tenancy continued.

For property owners, the consequences of getting service wrong can be serious: delays to redevelopment or re-letting, ongoing security of tenure, and potential claims for unlawful eviction. For tenants wanting to serve a break clause, it would mean being trapped with a lease they didn’t want.

With the postal system not being as reliable, relying on one method of posting is increasingly risky. Notices can be delayed, misdirected or returned.

Before serving any formal notice, it is vital to check the lease carefully and consider using multiple methods of service, keeping clear records of what has been done and checking that registered post has actually been delivered.

At Wilson Browne, our Commercial Property Team can help ensure notices are served correctly, protecting your position and avoiding costly disputes.

Get in contact with our team today or call 0800 088 6004.