Category: landlord & tenant

Majorstake Ltd v Curtis [2008] UKHL 10; [2008] WLR (D) 32

“For the purposes of s 47(2) of the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 ‘the premises’ in which a flat was contained was an objectively recognisable space which a visitor would regard as the premises. The combination of the tenant’s flat and the flat immediately below it in a block of 50 flats on nine floors did not comprise “the premises” in which the tenant’s flat was contained. The landlord’s proposal to redevelop the two flats into a single unit could not therefore defeat the tenant’s right to acquire a new lease.”

WLR Daily, 6th February 2008

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Boss Holdings Ltd v Grosvenor West End Properties and Another

House of Lords

“A property was a house, which a leaseholder was entitled to acquire, if it had been designed for living in when it was first built and the structure remained substantially the same, even if it had subsequently become internally dilapidated and incapable of beneficial occupation.”

The Times, 4th February 2008

Source: www.timesonline.co.uk

Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.

Boss Holdings Ltd v Grosvenor West End Properties and another [2007] UKHL 5; [2008] WLR (D) 16

“A property which had been ‘designed … for living in’ when it was originally built, and which remained substantially so designed, was a ‘house’ within the meaning of s 2(1) of the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 regardless of whether it had subsequently become internally dilapidated and incapable of immediate residential occupation.”

WLR Daily, 30th January 2008

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Poets Chase Freehold Co. Ltd. v. Sinclair Gardens Investments (Kensington) Ltd. [2007] EWHC 1776 (Ch) 

“A notice that was purportedly given under s 13 of the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993, but was subsequently accepted by the qualifying tenants to have failed to comply with the requirements of s 13(3), was an invalid notice that did not have statutory consequences and there was nothing in Chapter 1 of Part 1 of the Act to bar the tenants from serving without delay a valid s 13 notice.”

WLR Daily, 26th July 2007

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Obligation gives tenant protection

Polarpark Enterprises Inc v. Allason

Chancery Division

“A licensee who occupied a property under a trust deed, which contained an obligation to repair and insure the property, had a protected licence.”

The Times, 26th June 2007

Source: www.timesonline.co.uk

Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.

Howard de Walden Estates Ltd. v. Aggio and others; Earl Cadogan and another v. 26 Cadogan Square Ltd. [2007] EWCA Civ 499 

“It was not within the contemplation of the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 that the leaseholder of a long lease of a building, which included multiple flats and common parts, came within the expression “a qualifying tenant of a flat” in s 56(1) so as to be able to exercise a statutory right to acquire a new long lease of a flat in the leased building, and the landlord of such a leaseholder was not bound to grant a new long lease.”

WLR Daily, 24th May 2007

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Lay and others v. Drexler and others [2007] EWCA Civ 464

“Where a tenant had filed an acknowledgment of service indicating an intention to take a new lease in response to his landlord’s application to the court to grant a new lease under the amended provisions of s 24(1) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, subsequent notice to the court that the tenant no longer wanted a new tenancy was similar to filing of a notice to discontinue a claim for a new lease justifying an order that the tenant should pay the costs of the entire proceedings to the landlord.”

WLR Daily, 18th May 2007

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Assured tenant became a tolerated trespasser

Knowsley Housing Trust v. White

Court of Appeal

“Where, in the case of an assured tenancy governed by the Housing Act 1988, the court granted an order for possession using County Court Form N28 but suspended execution on terms, the tenancy expired on the last date stated for possession, and the occupant remained thereafter as a tolerated trespasser.”

The Times, 15th May 2007

Source: www.timesonline.co.uk

Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.

Knowsley Housing Trust v. White (Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government intervening) [2007] EWCA Civ 404

“In the case of an assured tenancy, where the court granted an order for possession using County Court Form N28 but suspended execution on terms, the assured tenancy expired on the last date stated for possession and the occupant remained merely as a ‘tolerated trespasser’.”

WLR Daily, 2nd May 2007

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Fresh proceedings against tenant

London and Quadrant Housing Trust v. Ansell 

Court of Appeal

“A landlord could issue fresh proceedings against a secure tenant who had failed to pay arrears of rent on time under a previous possession order and had stayed in occupation, rather than seeking to revive that previous order.”

The Times, 25th April 2007

Source: www.timesonline.co.uk

Tenants can serve notice on freeholder

Kensington Heights Commercial Co. Ltd. v. Campden Hill Developments Ltd.

Court of Appeal

“Where a landlord entered into a contract to surrender a headlease without serving a notice on the qualifying tenants, they were entitled to serve a notice on the freeholder requiring him to grant a new lease to their nominee on the same terms as the surrendered lease.”

The Times, 20th April 2007

Source: www.timesonline.co.uk

Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.