Scottish and Newcastle Plc (original respondents and cross-applicants) v Raguz (original appellant and cross-respondent) [electronic resource]

[2008] UKHL 65, 29 October 2008. In a victory for common sense, landlords will no longer need to serve notices in respect of an outstanding rent review, thereby removing an administrative headache. The appellant appealed against a decision (see L13384 and L137096) that the scope of the indemnity under the Land Registration Act 1925 S24 was not limited to payments that the assignor was legally entitled to make. The respondent cross-appealed against the Court of Appeal's decision that certain rent review increases were irrecoverable because of a failure to serve S17 notices under the Landlord and Tenant (Covenants) Act 1995. At issue was when an increase under a rent review was to be treated as having become due, and whether the implied covenant to indemnify in S24 of the 1925 Act was limited to payments that the assignor was legally liable to make. Held: appeal dismissed, cross-appeal allowed. There is no need to serve default notices on former tenants for any unascertained uplift in rent which may become due on an outstanding rent review. A notice is only needed once the review has been determined and the current tenant does not pay the backdated arrears.