‘The London Borough of Islington has secured a £3,000-plus costs order in its favour after a judge found that landlords had “behaved unreasonably in bringing an appeal which they never intended to pursue properly and never did pursue properly”.’
Local Government Lawyer, 19th June 2017
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘The Upper Tribunal reversed decisions from the First Tier Tribunal in respect of the validity of estimated service demands, the requirements to prove the service of a notice under section 20B in light of the incorporation of section 196 of the Law of Property Act 1925 in the lease, and whether a tenant had waived the Landlord’s non-compliance with service charge mechanism of the lease by conduct.’
Tanfield Chambers, 1st June 2017
Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk
‘A local authority was required to give credit to leaseholders for funds received from third-parties when recovering a contribution to the cost of major works.’
Tanfield Chambers, 1st June 2017
Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk
‘Since the Supreme Court turned the law of dispensation from the consultation requirements upside down in Daejan Investments Ltd v Benson [2013] UKSC 14; [2013] 2 EGLR 45, the Upper Tribunal has been troubled with very few cases involving the requirements to consult leaseholders on major works. However, the decision in Lessees of Foundling Court and O’Donnell Court v Camden London Borough Council and others [2016] UKUT 366 (LC); [2016] EGLR 59 has rewritten preconceptions as to who needs to be consulted and caused landlords some new headaches.’
Tanfield Chambers, 12th June 2017
Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk
‘The Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants (JCWI) has begun crowd funding ahead of a potential legal challenge to the roll-out of the Right to Rent scheme to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.’
Local Government Lawyer, 31st May 2017
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘This was an appeal to the UT on various issue arising from an FTT decision. We will not dwell on the issue of specific charges not being consulted on under s.20, but not – as the UT found, overturning the FTT – subject to a Qualifying Long Term Agreement, because the more general point concerned the landlord having put some £11,000 of legal costs on the drawn out service charge disputes through on the service charge (not, we should note, as an administrative charge).’
Nearly Legal, 28th May 2017
Source: nearlylegal.co.uk
‘Three family members who received £112,000 a year by housing 31 people into a four-bedroom home in Wembley, have been found guilty of breaching landlord licensing rules.’
Local Government Lawyer, 24th May 2017
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has applied for an injunction against Fergus Wilson.’
BBC News, 17th May 2017
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘The Government is facing a legal challenge over its policy of forcing landlords to conduct immigration checks on their tenant.’
The Independent, 16th May 2017
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘The Upper Tribunal has held that an estimated service charge that had not been demanded in accordance with a lease would not have been payable but for the lessee taking out a loan from the lessor to pay it and thereby waiving strict compliance with the terms of the lease; s.7, Interpretation Act 1978 does not apply to notices served under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 unless a lease provides that s.196 Law of Property Act 1925 is to apply to the service of notices’
Arden Chambers, 20th April 2017
Source: www.ardenchambers.com
In re Amin; Abdulla v Whelan and others [2017] EWHC 605 (Ch)
‘At the time of a bankruptcy order made against him, the bankrupt held a property with another person under the terms of an underlease for a term expiring on 31 July 2018. The trustee in bankruptcy served a notice of disclaimer under section 315 of the Insolvency Act 1986 disclaiming all of its and the bankrupt’s interest in the leasehold property under the terms of the underlease. The trustee, supported by the landlords, contended that the notice of disclaimer did not end the legal estate in the underlease and that the bankrupt’s estate remained liable for the payment of the rent until the expiry of its term. A person claiming to be one of the bankrupt’s creditors contended that the notice of disclaimer disclaimed all of the bankrupt’s interest in the underlease and that the bankrupt’s estate was liable for no further rent after the disclaimer. Judgment was given in favour of the trustee and landlords.’
WLR Daily, 20th April 2017
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘First, a Southwark rent arrears possession case, demonstrating that the effects of Jones v London Borough of Southwark [2016] EWHC 457 (Ch) (our report) rumble on in Southwark, despite the Council agreeing to repay overcharged water rates for the period 2001-2013 to the tenants. (Our thanks to Serdar Celebi, Cambridge House Law Centre and Tim Baldwin, Garden Court Chambers for the note).’
Nearly Legal, 16th April 2017
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
‘Ms Oliver was the long leaseholder in a block of flats on the Lansdowne Estate, which was owned by the Council. The Council carried out city wide major works, which included works on the Lansdown Estate. Some of the works were eligible for a contribution from a commercial energy company as part of the Community Energy Savings Programme (“CESP”). In total 15 of the 25 blocks on the Lansdowne Estate were eligible to receive CESP funding. The contribution to Ms Oliver’s block was £43,570.44. The Council decided not to pass the CESP directly to the leaseholders as a set off against their service charge contributions. Rather, the Council decided to attribute the money to the funding of works to its city-wide housing stock. The effect of this was that every leaseholder’s service charge was reduced irrespective of whether their block had been entitled to CESP funding.’
Nearly Legal, 10th April 2017
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
‘In 5 conjoined appeals the Court of Appeal considered whether there had been a failure to comply with the statutory procedural provisions and the consequences thereof.’
Tanfield Chambers, 27th March 2017
Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk
‘The Court of Appeal has dismissed an appeal against a decision that two joint tenants had lost security of tenure under the Housing Act 1985 because they no longer occupied the property as their only or principal home.’
Arden Chambers, 16th March 2017
Source: www.ardenchambers.com
‘The Court of Appeal has held that the difference in the residence requirements for statutory succession to secure tenancies between married couples (or civil partners) and unmarried couples living together as man and wife (or as civil partners) under the former s.87, Housing Act 1985, was not a breach of Art.14, European Convention of Human Rights, read with Art.8.’
Arden Chambers, 24th March 2017
Source: www.ardenchambers.com
‘The Court of Appeal has held that the words “costs … incurred” in the service charge provisions in a right to buy lease were to be given a natural and not a special meaning; accordingly, the Upper Tribunal had been wrong to hold that such costs were reduced by third-party energy-saving funding received by the landlord from an energy provider in relation to a major works programme; but the Court was required to determine for itself the “fair proportion” of the costs to which the leaseholder was required to contribute, and a deduction was to be made in relation to part of the funding received which was attributable to the leaseholder’s flat.’
Arden Chambers, 4th April 2017
Source: www.ardenchambers.com
‘The Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) has held that it is was not unreasonable conduct for the purposes of r.13(1)(b), Tribunal Procedure Rules, for a landlord to seek to rely on an agreement that service charges were payable, even if that agreement was subsequently determined to be void. Nor did the landlord’s failure to mediate amount to unreasonable conduct in circumstances where the prospects of a reaching an agreement were slight and the costs of mediation likely to be disproportionate. It also held that orders pursuant to s.20C, Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, should not treat participating leaseholders differently from one another on the basis of their involvement in proceedings. The focus should be on the landlord’s degree of success regardless of each individual leaseholder’s involvement.’
Arden Chambers, 3rd March 2017
Source: www.ardenchambers.com
‘Did the pre Localism Act 2011 succession rules for a secure tenancy amount to a breach of article 8 and 14 (private life and non-discrimination), and if so, should a declaration of incompatibility be made if the Housing Act 1985 could not be read compatibly? This was the issue in this appeal.’
Nearly Legal, 3rd April 2017
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
‘The Supreme Court has refused to grant Leeds City Council permission to appeal a key ruling over whether landlords are responsible for paying council tax on a property when a tenant has moved out before the tenancy agreement has formally ended.’
Local Government Lawyer, 30th March 2017
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2025