Having correctly held that, although the amount stated in the formal demand to pay referring to the termination clause exceeded the amount due, the demand was not void but was valid only for the sum due, and having found, on its own grounds and those adopted from the lower court, that the landlord had duly explained the calculation of the indexation, produced all relevant supporting documents concerning the service charges for 2004 to 2008 and was no longer claiming any service charge arrears, a court of appeal was entitled to infer, in view of the explanations and corrections provided, that the formal demand enabled the tenant to verify the existence and extent of its debt and was valid (1st case).

Having found that, since the formal demand did not list the alleged late rent payments, no breach of the lease clauses was established, a court of appeal correctly inferred that the termination clause could not be applied on that ground (2nd case).