Prempeh v Lakhany (2020) EWCA Civ 1422

In this case the tenants, Miss Baker and Miss Prempeh,renteda property in London from Miss Lakhany (the landlord). An agreement was entered into on 16th December 2016 and a deposit was paid. Subsequently Miss Baker left the property and Miss Prempeh maintained that there was then a further agreement dated 17th December 2017 and she was then the sole tenant of the property. The tenant fell into rent arrears and a section 8 notice was served specifying grounds 8, 10 and 11. At the first hearing it was argued that the second tenancy agreement which showed the landlord as the company O’Sullivan was a forgery. The issues in question at the hearing were which tenancy agreement was the correct one and whether the section 8 notice was invalid because it did not comply with section 47 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 in that a rent demand must include the landlord’s address.

The section 8 notice was signed by the landlord’s agent and the notice gave the name, address and telephone number of the landlord’s agent. The landlord’s name and address was not included in the section 8 notice. The covering letter sent with the section 8 notice stated that the agent acted for the landlord. The question raised on appeal was whether a section 8 notice is a rent demand and whether it must contain the landlord’s name and address.