Home > Property > Missing Words Invalidated Tenant’S Break Notice

Missing Words Invalidated Tenant’S Break Notice

Tenants giving break notices must include any wording required by the lease, and comply completely with any notice requirements in the lease, or risk them being invalid, the High Court has ruled.

A break clause in a lease gave a tenant a right to serve a break notice to end the lease but said the notice “must be expressed to be given under section 24(2) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954”. Notice was given but did not include these words. At the time the lease was drafted these words had a particular legal significance that no longer applied when the notice was later given. The landlord claimed the notice was invalid.

The Court of Appeal said that ‘must’ meant ‘must’ and the notice was therefore invalid, even though the missing ‘magic words’ were no longer legally significant. It relied on wording from a judgment in a 1997 case:

“If the clause had said that the notice had to be on blue paper, it would have been no good serving a notice on pink paper, however clear it might have been that the tenant wanted to terminate the lease.”

The lease therefore continued.


Tenants must comply exactly with any requirement in their leases governing the wording to be used in break notices, even if the original reasons for including that wording no longer apply.

Case ref: Friends Life Limited v Siemens Hearing Instruments Limited [2014] EWCA Civ 382

Posted by:

Jonathan Waters

Request a Call Back

People frequently tell us that we’re approachable and offer great advice.

They also tell us most solicitors are hard to get hold of whereas we’re happy to listen. The reason for this is that we value long term relationships and we’re happy to speak with business people, to invest our time in understanding your business and whatever your concerns are. Only at that point can we understand whether we’re the right people to help you.

Related Blogs: