Originally posted by AndrewDod
View Post
Lots of court claims fail before a defence is even offered.
Is that actually true? You could say the same about landlord right to enter for example.
If AST says "I may enter the property under x circumstances"
X arises
Tenant refuses entry
The fact is that T is simultaneously in breach of contract BUT L has no means of enforcing correction of the breach other than via a court
If AST says "I may enter the property under x circumstances"
X arises
Tenant refuses entry
The fact is that T is simultaneously in breach of contract BUT L has no means of enforcing correction of the breach other than via a court
If the contract said L has to give 2 weeks notice to enter L would still have to go to court (but only after 2 weeks) - but the contractual term woiuld still be a valid term.
And it would be the same with any non-legal notice periods.
Indeed that is surely exactly why the tenant has to pay the costs of the hearing
Which means that the claim was valid, not that they were in breach of contract.
Comment