‘Paragraph 13 of Schedule 8 BSA and regulation 6 of the Building Safety (Leaseholder Protections) (Information etc.) (England) Regulations 2022 contain short time limits and detailed prescribed requirements for landlords to comply with in seeking leaseholder deeds of certificate.’
Falcon Chambers, 26th November 2024
Source: www.falcon-chambers.com
‘Leaseholders living in a block of flats have reported their management company to the housing ombudsman in a dispute over maintenance costs.’
BBC News, 10th December 2024
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘The government has finally delivered a timetable for reforming the “feudal” leasehold system in England and Wales, but some campaigners have again accused Labour of procrastination.’
Law Society's Gazette, 22nd November 2024
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘Today the Law Commission has published its first consultation paper considering how the right to renew business tenancies, set out in Part 2 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 (and which is called “security of tenure”), is working and whether it meets the needs of business tenants and landlords. The Commission would like to hear from businesses, landlords, their representative bodies and advisors, and anyone else affected by the legislation.’
Law Commission, 19th November 2024
Source: lawcom.gov.uk
‘Welcome to our latest post on the BSA 2022, covering some of the current talking points in this area, from the amendments to the BSA made by the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024, various of which will commence this week on 31 October 2024, to a selection of the issues arising in the recent cases.’
Falcon Chambers, 28th October 2024
Source: www.falcon-chambers.com
‘In Nuernberg v Adderstone (216 Res) Limited, MAN/00CJ/BSC/2024/0001 the FTT expanded the circumstances where a landlord is required to give a “Landlord Deed of Certificate” to a tenant pursuant to the Building Safety (Leaseholder Protections) (England) Regulations 2022 (“the Leaseholder Protections Regulations”). As stated in the succinct judgment of Judge J Holbrook, a “single – but important – question of statutory interpretation” appears to have been resolved (for now).’
Falcon Chambers, 14th October 2024
Source: www.falcon-chambers.com
‘A few quick notes on some leasehold related cases. A1 Properties (Sunderland) Ltd v Tudor Studios RTM Company Ltd (2024) UKSC 27. The Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 stipulates that a Notice of Claim for Right to Manage must be served on “each person who is a landlord under a lease of the whole or any part of the premises”.’
Nearly Legal, 3rd November 2024
Source: nearlylegal.co.uk
‘Zaid Alothman Holdings Ltd & Ors v Better Intelligent Management Ltd & Anor (COSTS – CONDUCT – what amounts to “unreasonable conduct”) (2024) UKUT 253 (LC)
This was the appellant leaseholders’ appeal from an FTT decision refusing them Rule 13 costs on the freeholder/managing agent’s application for determination of breach of lease which was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. It isn’t so much of interest for the decision itself (though that is interesting) but about what the conduct of the freeholder, the tangle of the law and the messy outcome say about the state of leasehold law in general.’
Nearly Legal, 22nd September 2024
Source: nearlylegal.co.uk
‘This brief article, written by Christopher Buckingham, considers the law of forfeiture in the light of the recent High Court decision of The Tropical Zoo Limited v The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Hounslow [2024] EWHC 1240 (Ch).’
St Philips Barristers, 15th August 2024
Source: st-philips.com
‘Today [16 August], the Supreme Court has handed down a significant judgment in the second ever “leapfrog” appeal from the Upper Tribunal: A1 Properties (Sunderland) Ltd v Tudor Studios RTM Company Ltd [2024] UKSC 27. The appeal concerns an issue of statutory interpretation that frequently arises across all areas of the law: where a statute lays down a procedural framework for exercising a statutory right, but is silent as to the consequences of a failure to comply with that framework, how should the court ascertain what Parliament intended should follow from the non-compliance?’
Landmark Chambers, 16th August 2024
Source: landmarkchambers.co.uk
‘A landlord owes certain duties to maintain the repair of a property that they have leased to a tenant. If a leased property falls into disrepair, the tenant may be able to claim against the landlord for damages. The tenant may also be able to counterclaim for disrepair where the landlord has brought a claim for property possession against the tenant. Where possession is being sought under the grounds of rent arrears, the tenant can assert that the Claimant landowner is not entitled to the full amount of rent owed.’
Becket Chambers, 22nd July 2024
Source: becket-chambers.co.uk
‘Zoe McLean-Wells analyses a recent Upper Tribunal (UT) decision which considered a landlord’s ability to charge a service charge for works required to remediate inherent structural defects.’
Local Government Lawyer, 7th August 2024
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘Thanet Lodge (Mapesbury Road) & Anor v Mirchandani (LANDLORD AND TENANT – SERVICE CHARGES – recovery of legal and mediation expenses as service charges) (2024) UKUT 205 (LC). This was an appeal on a leaseholder’s challenge to the payability of legal costs that the RTM company had sought to put through the service charge.’
Nearly Legal, 28th July 2024
Source: nearlylegal.co.uk
‘London Borough of Tower Hamlets v Lessees of Brewster House and Malting House (2024) UKUT 193 (LC) (11 July 2024). This was an appeal to the Upper Tribunal on whether a service charge for major works to remedy structural defects to two blocks of flats was payable. It may well have broader significance for charges for building safety works, depending on lease terms.’
Nearly Legal, 15th July 2024
Source: nearlylegal.co.uk
‘Sarah Wertheim and Francesca Gallagher examine the impact of recent and upcoming changes in EPC legislation on commercial landlords.’
Local Government Lawyer, 8th July 2024
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘Katherine Traynor analyses a recent ruling that considere important questions of wider implication for possession proceedings concerning shared ownership leases.’
Local Government Lawyer, 9th July 2024
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘Triplark Limited v Whale and others [2024] EWHC 1440 (Ch): a landlord’s works are not within the terms of its repairing covenant where they increase the maintenance burden on the tenant.’
Tanfield Chambers, 25th June 2024
Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk
‘A London council has been forcing residents into silence as a condition of them receiving money owed to them for building work and services they had been overcharged for – in some cases by tens of thousands of pounds.’
BBC News, 30th June 2024
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘A few quick notes on various leasehold related cases. Howe Properties (NE) Ltd v Accent Housing Ltd (2024) EWCA Civ 297. Accent Housing levied a management fee on leaseholders which was at flat rate and a) differed by tenure (freehold and assured tenancies were at different rates) and b) was charged as against Accent’s management costs across its whole estate, some 3058 leasehold properties, not just this specific development.’
Nearly Legal, 30th June 2024
Source: nearlylegal.co.uk
‘The Defendant owns the former County Hall opposite the Houses of Parliament on the South Bank. Until March 2019, the Claimant, the well-known “quick service” restaurant chain, ran a restaurant from part of the ground floor and basement of the building pursuant to a lease which had the protection of the 1954 Act. The restaurant was one of the Claimants highest profile sites. At the end of the contractual term, the Defendant landlord served a notice pursuit to section 25 indicating that it would oppose the grant of any new tenancy on the “own occupation” ground in section 30(1)(g). That lead to proceedings in the County Court at Central London in late 2018. The Defendant called two witnesses who attested that the landlord intended to run its own restaurant from the premises serving Japanese food under the trading name “Zen Bento”. It produced a business plan to that effect. The landlord’s principal offered an undertaking to that effect. Despite extensive cross-examination of the landlord’s witnesses, the County Court Judge accepted the landlord’s case, and indeed its undertaking, that it had a firm and settled intention to open a “Zen Bento” restaurant and made an order terminating the tenancy in March 2019. However, the landlord failed to open a restaurant at the site when it said it was going to (by November 2019). It opened a restaurant on the ground floor in March 2020 and, having opened the same restaurant briefly in September 2020 and closed it due to COVID restrictions, it opened a different restaurant, a coffee shop and bakery, in the basement in early 2021. The former tenants sued the Defendant in deceit and for damages under section 37A of the 1954 Act. The landlord accepted that the restaurants which it had in fact opened (and which were still trading) were different from the one it had told the County Court it intended to open and that there had been a delay in opening them but said it had genuinely changed its mind as to what it wanted to do and that the delay was largely down to COVID restrictions.’
Landmark Chambers, 13th May 2024
Source: www.landmarkchambers.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2024