Hello readers,
Although Section 21 is due to be removed with the changes under the Renters’ Rights Bill, I have received an interesting alert that I thought I would share with you in relation of the validity of documents served.
The case in question is an appeal court decision on the D’Aubigny (Appellant) v Khan and another (Respondents) (2025). It’s quite technical, so I’ve summarised an outline of some of the vital things landlords will want to take away from this.
Details of the case
In this case, the landlords Kameel Khan, Julia Randell-Khan sought possession of a property on an assured shorthold tenancy using a Section 21 notice.
The tenant, Elena D’Aubigny claimed that the Section 21 notice was invalid because she said she had never received the necessary statutory information during her tenancy (gas safety certificate, the energy performance certificate (EPC) and a current version of the How to Rent guide).
The landlords explained that the documents had been sent by post using recorded delivery and argued that they had, in fact, been ‘given’ because they had not been returned or marked undelivered.
The landlords won the original hearing, however the tenant then appealed, the case was reviewed in the Court of Appeal and the judge again sided with the landlord.
The landlord’s argument
You might be wondering, if the case ended up with the landlord winning why is it even important?
Well, there is a lesson to be learnt!
Without getting drowned in the detail, there were three main points to the landlords’ argument and these were:
- The Interpretation Act 1978, which provides general rules for interpreting words, phrases, and provisions in UK legislation says that once there is a document has been properly addressed and posted, any claim of non-receipt would require supporting evidence.
Simply saying that a document did not arrive is not strong enough to say it was not ‘served’. - The wording below from the tenancy agreement stated that documents can be sent by first class post:
“Any notice sent to the Tenant under or in connection with this agreement shall be deemed to have been properly served if […] sent by first class post to the Property”. - There is a common law presumption that a properly addressed and posted letter is deemed to have been delivered. This presumption stands unless the recipient can present sufficient evidence to the contrary.
The ruling and reasoning
At the original hearing, the Deputy District Judge and the Circuit Judge ruled in favour of the landlord on all three arguments, resulting in a possession order being granted.
Interestingly, in the second hearing, the Court of Appeal rejected the first point. This was the landlord’s argument based on the Interpretation Act 1978. It found that the Act does not apply to the service of Section 21 notices.
Regardless of this, the court accepted the landlord’s position on points two and three and the case was closed.
Lessons to take away
Whilst Section 21 and Assured Shorthold Tenancies are due to be abolished when the Renters’ Rights Bill passes into law, there are some crucial points of clarification here.
Although the case ultimately concluded in the landlord’s favour, these matters are lengthy, stressful and expensive and there will undoubtedly be times when the Renters’ Rights Bill has passed that notices need to be served.
Attention should be taken to the above clause and all tenancy agreements should reference electronic means in addition to post. If your tenancy agreement does not contain the correct wording to allow for electronic serving of notices, then duplicating communications could be the best option to safeguard yourself.
I wonder, have you any views on this case or ever had a similar situation yourself? If you have a tricky situation with a tenant feel free to contact me via email at hasan@home-share.co.uk and I will be happy to advise you.
Hasan
