Rent Notice Validity: Mooney v Whiteland Insight

The Court of Appeal has recently delivered its judgment in the case of Mooney v Whiteland [2023] EWCA Civ 67, providing clarity on the requirements for a valid notice to increase rent under a periodic tenancy following Section 13 of the Housing Act 1988.


The dispute centred around a week-to-week tenancy that commenced on Monday, 20th May 1991, with rent typically due each Monday. However, the tenant habitually paid rent on the preceding Friday. In October 2018, the landlord served a notice proposing an increase in rent from £25 to £100 per week, effective from Friday, 7th December 2018, rather than the subsequent Monday. The tenant contested the validity of the notice, leading to a preliminary court determination.

County Court Judgments

Initially, Deputy District Judge Evans, sitting in the County Court at Swansea, deemed the notice valid, interpreting it against the tenant's payment practice and considering the tenant's objections merely technical. On appeal, His Honour Judge Beard in Cardiff concluded the notice was invalid, identifying multiple possible interpretations and stating it was not clear to a reasonable recipient that the landlord intended for the rent increase to start on Monday, 10th December 2018.

Court of Appeal Decision

The Court of Appeal, presided over by Lord Justice Males, Lord Justice Snowden, and Lady Justice Thirlwall, upheld Judge Beard's decision, citing the following reasons:

Interpretation of the Notice

The Court of Appeal rejected the landlord's argument that a reasonable tenant would understand the notice contained a date error and was intended to take effect from Monday, 10th December 2018. Instead, the Court determined that the tenant is not required to infer such an error if the notice does not explicitly state the correct date, which should be the commencement of a new rental period (i.e., a Monday).

Statutory Requirements

To be valid, the notice must meet specific statutory requirements; notably, the new rent must "take effect at the beginning of a new period of the tenancy specified in the notice". The Court clarified that for the subject weekly tenancy, the notice should have specified a Monday as the effective date for the new rent.

Jurisdiction of Rent Assessment Committees

The Court also addressed the jurisdictional scope of rent assessment committees, determining they do not possess the authority to decide on the validity of a Section 13 notice. Instead, this is a matter for the courts, as set out in Section 40 of the 1988 Act. Therefore, the tenant's failure to refer the notice to the committee did not preclude the court from adjudicating on its validity.


The Court of Appeal's judgment affirms that a notice to increase rent under Section 13 of the Housing Act 1988 must unequivocally state the day marking the start of a new tenancy period and that the rent assessment committee cannot rule on the notice's validity.

This case serves as a reminder to landlords to ensure that rent increase notices are clear, unambiguous, and comply with statutory requirements to avoid disputes and potential dismissal of such notices.

Impact for Landlords

Landlords must meticulously prepare and serve notices for rent increases to ensure compliance with legal standards. A notice's failure to meet statutory requirements or to communicate the intended changes can lead to its invalidity and the inability to enforce new rent terms.

View Related Handbook Page

Changing the Rent

Learn the rent review process in assured shorthold tenancies. We cover rent review clauses, tenant agreements, and Housing Act 1988, Section 13.