The Gazette 1961 - 64

refused her leave. The widow then appealed to the High Court. • •'/"".'' " - .::'." Mr. Justice Megaw allowed' her appeal in Chambers on June 6th, 1962. He ordered that the widow be permitted to intervene and that the infant plaintiff should amend her Writ so that she claimed in her own behalf and in that of the widow. The defendants then appealed against this judgment to the Court of Appeal. Lord Denning, giving judgment, said that it was clear that the writ itself was not a nullity and that a dependant could bring an action by himself on behalf of another; for although the endorsement on the writ might be irregular, the irregularity could be removed by a statement of claim setting out the full particulars. It would be most prejudicial if when one dependant had been overlooked in an action the proceedings could be held to be a nullity, for this might enable a defendant to take advantage of the Statute of Limitations against the actual plaintiff in the action. Irregularities did not of themselves render the proceedings and the orders of the Registrar null and void. The Court ought to set aside the decision of the District Registrar, remove the stay and make an order in the form decided by Mr. Justice Megaw protecting the infant's interest but permitting the widow to claim. He would dismiss the appeal. Lord Justice Danckwerts and Lord Justice Davies agreed. The appeal was dismissed with costs. Leave to appeal to the House of Lords was refused. (Cooper v. Williams and anor. The Guardian, The landlord of an agricultural holding, held by a tenant on a tenancy from year to year under an agreement made in 1943, served on the tenant a valid notice to quit to expire on 2gth September, 1960. On September 8th, 1960, the landlord served on the tenant a further notice to quit expiring on September 29th, 1961. The tenant endorsed on the second notice to quit the receipt thereof without prejudice to further agreement and thereafter rent was paid and accepted up to September 29th, 1961. The landlord sought possession on that date and in an action by him for possession it was held that his claim failed on the grounds that the legal effect of giving the second notice to quit had been to create a new tenancy immediately after the tenancy sub sisting under the 1943 agreement expired pursuant to the first notice to quit and this new tenancy was a tenancy for one year. The further grounds were that the second notice to quit was ineffective to determine the new tenancy because it had been February zyth, 1963.) Effect of a notice to quit

given before the commencement thereof. It was stated in the course of the judgment that a notice to quit is a notice given by an existing landlord to -an existing tenant and if that view be right a person cannot give a valid notice to quit before he is become a landlord and the recipient of his notice has become the tenant, or before legal relations exist between them which otherwise permit of such a notice (Lower v. Sorrell, 1962 All England Reports, page 1074). Note.— It is quite probable that the above case would not be followed in this country if the occasion arose due to the decision of the Irish Court of Appeal in the case of Lord Inchiquin v. Lyons XX L.R. Ir. 474). In that case a notice to quit was served and before the expiry date an agreement was reached between the landlord and the tenant for an increase in the rent. The notice to quit was accordingly not acted upon and some years later the landlord served a new notice to quit and sought possession of the lands. It was held that a notice to quit which is, during its currency, abandoned by the consent of both parties and not acted on does not per se put an end to the tenancy from year to year and consequently would riot operate to create a new tenancy. In this case the Irish Court of Appeal distinguished the case of Tayleur v. Wilden (1868 L.R. 3 Exch. 303) which was followed in the case above reported. It is quite probable, therefore, that if an Irish court had to decide on the facts above reported that it would be held that the tacit abandonment or waiver of the first notice to quit by the service and accept ance of a new notice to quit did not operate to determine the original tenancy on the expiry of , the first notice to quit and that no new tenancy was created.

CALENDAR AND LAW DIRECTORY, 1963

The Society's CALENDAR AND LAW DIRECTORY for 1963 is now on sale to members. Price io/~ (Postage, 1/3 extra.)

THE REGISTRY Register A.

ENERGETIC young assistant at least 5 years qualified required for provincial country practice. Good experience of con veyancing and Probate essential. Please reply, with full particulars of experience to Box No.