“…must be a ‘reasonable’ lapse of time is unworkable and does not satisfy the requirements for an implied term: Marks & Spencer Plc v BNP Paribas [2015] UKSC 72; [2016] A.C. 742 at [14]-[24]. Also, it would create huge uncertainty in future cases. Where the contract requires a specific period of time to elapse between notices, it says …”
“…s which arise when considering whether to imply any term of the first type referred to by Lord Neuberger in Marks & Spencer PLC v BNP Paribas Security Services [2016] A.C. 742 AT [15]. If it mattered I would treat it as an issue of construction, as did both Greer LJ and Roche LJ in Monroe. The only implication is the implication into…”