‘A breach of lease case in the Upper Tribunal which, despite the names, appears to be between two unrelated people. So I shall call them L – the leaseholder – and F – the freeholder – to avoid multiple Gibbins related confusion.’
Nearly Legal, 13th December 2020
Source: nearlylegal.co.uk
‘The tenants (Claimants) had a twenty-year lease of 89 Narborough Road, Leicester (Property) which commenced on 12 March 2008. The Property consisted of a lock-up shop on the ground floor with residential accommodation above. The Claimants mistakenly paid only £1,500 of the £2,000 quarterly instalment of rent that fell due in June 2018, leaving arrears of £500.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 14th October 2020
Source: hardwicke.co.uk
‘Keshwala & Anor v Bhalsod & Anor (2020) EWHC 2372 (QB). An appeal from a Circuit Judge’s decision refusing relief from forfeiture, focussing on the issue of delay in making the application for relief. This was a commercial lease, though with living accommodation above. Mr Keshwala had taken a 20 year lease of the property in 2008. In 2015, the current freeholder had bought the freehold. Also in 2015, the rent first fell into arrears. The freeholder forfeited by re-entry and Mr K obtained relief from forfeiture on payment of arrears and costs.’
Nearly Legal, 4th October 2020
Source: nearlylegal.co.uk
‘The competition watchdog has launched enforcement action against four of the UK’s leading housing developers – Barratt, Persimmon, Taylor Wimpey and Countryside Properties – after an investigation uncovered evidence that leasehold homeowners and prospective buyers were being misled and charged excessive fees.’
The Guardian, 4th September 2020
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘The “flexible tenancy” was the latest, and mercifully the last, in a long line of new “tenancies” created by Parliament to address perceived deficiencies within social housing. The flexible tenancy is a fixed term secure tenancy that is capable of determination at the end of its term by not becoming a secure periodic tenancy. Its purpose was to enable a greater churn of social housing and to ensure that such housing went to those tenants in greatest housing need. The flexible tenancy did not prove popular—there are said to be only 30,000 flexible tenancies in existence—and Parliament’s proposal to make such tenancies mandatory (under the Housing and Planning Act 2016) has never been brought into force.’
Tanfield Chambers, 11th August 2020
Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk
‘The appeal related to a restrictive covenant given by the developer of a shopping centre in a lease that it granted to a retailer over part of the centre. In giving the covenant the developer and later Peninsula each undertook not to allow any substantial shop to be built on the rest of the centre in competition with the Dunnes. Peninsula then argued that the covenant engaged the doctrine of restraint of trade; that it was unreasonable; and that it was therefore unenforceable. The appeal to the Supreme Court concerned whether the covenant engages the doctrine.’
UKSC Blog, 19th August 2020
Source: ukscblog.com
‘A High Court judge has dismissed a bid by a landlord to have set aside an arbitrator’s award that favoured a council as tenant of a city centre property.’
Local Government Lawyer, 4th August 2020
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘The Court of Appeal has given important clarity and breathing space to commercial and residential tenants in its recent judgment in TFS Stores Ltd v BMG (Ashford) Ltd & Ors [2020] EWCA Civ 833 by confirming that all parts of proceedings involving a claim for possession brought by a landlord are automatically stayed.’
Wilberforce Chambers, 23rd July 2020
Source: www.wilberforce.co.uk
‘The Law Commission has unveiled a blueprint for the future of home ownership – including a commonhold regime described as “fit for purpose” nearly two decades after the concept was introduced.’
Law Society's Gazette, 21st July 2020
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘A lease that contains a covenant against use other than as a private dwellinghouse is breached where the tenant opts to let the property out on short term lets through sites such as Airbnb and Booking.com. However, where the tenant still makes regular use of the property as a residence in and around those bookings, the tenant will not be in breach of a separate covenant not to carry on a business from the property (as distinct from a covenant not to use the property for a business).’
Tanfield Chambers, 30th June 2020
Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk
‘What happens when a landlord:
a. On the one hand, gives Tenant A a licence to do something which would otherwise be a breach of Tenant A’s lease, but;
b. On the other hand, is under an obligation to Tenant B to enforce the covenants in Tenant 1’s lease?’
St Ives Chambers, 6th July 2020
Source: www.stiveschambers.co.uk
‘An Upper Tribunal appeal of an FTT decision that the leaseholder, Ms M, was in breach of lease, and specifically a restriction “Not to do or permit or suffer in or upon the Demised Premises or any part thereof any illegal or immoral act or any act or thing which may be or may become a nuisance or annoyance or cause damage to the Lessors or the tenants of the Lessor or the occupiers of any part of the Building.”’
Nearly Legal, 1st July 2020
Source: nearlylegal.co.uk
‘Many property owners are taking advantage of new technology to advertise short term stays at their properties on various platforms. Two of the most common are Airbnb and Booking.com. Changes to the tax relief available on buy to let mortgages has also caused a move towards Furnished Holiday Lettings.’
St Ives Chambers, June 2020
Source: www.stiveschambers.co.uk
‘The recent case of Faiz & Ors v Burnley Borough Council [2020] EWHC 407 (Ch) provides clarity on a tricky practical issue: when can a landlord accept monies after it gains knowledge of its right to forfeit?’
Hardwicke Chambers, 17th June 2020
Source: hardwicke.co.uk
‘Since the property market coronavirus restrictions were lifted on 13 May 2020, there has been a reported rush to buy and sell houses and flats. Where property is leasehold, the sale of the lease is often the trigger which leads to a claim being made for either a new lease or the freehold under the Leasehold Reform Acts. The purchaser will always be concerned to see exactly what term is being acquired. A lessee of a flat wishing to buy a new lease must have owned the lease for two years before serving a notice (s. 39(2)(a) of the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993). The same ownership period applies to a claim to acquire the freehold of a house (s. 1(1)(b) of the Leasehold Reform Act 1967).’
Falcon Chambers, June 2020
Source: www.falcon-chambers.com
‘This case tested the extent to which information contained on the face of the property register to registered leasehold estates can be relied on. It is the first time the High Court has specifically ruled on the question of whether the title plan and the floor level note on the property register are conclusive and can be relied on in isolation from the underlying lease, for the purpose of ascertaining the vertical general boundaries. The judgment confirms that the Land Registration Act 2002 does not modify the long-established principle that the general boundaries are determined by construing the lease itself. To that end, the lease is effectively incorporated into the register of title by reference and by HM Land Registry keeping a copy, so the description of the registered estate on the face of the property register does not stand in isolation and must be read in conjunction with the registered lease.’
Landmark Chambers, 1st June 2020
Source: www.landmarkchambers.co.uk
‘Is a landlord of a block of flats entitled to grant a licence to a lessee to carry out work which would breach an absolute covenant contained in a lease of their flat, where the leases of other flats in the same building require them to enforce covenants at the request of a lessee of one of those other flats, without being in breach of the latter covenant?’
Becket Chambers, 11th June 2020
Source: becket-chambers.co.uk
‘The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 makes detailed provision for the regulation of residential service charges payable by long leaseholders. In particular, s.20B(1), 1985 Act provides that a tenant is not liable to pay service charges which were incurred more than 18 months before a demand for payment was served on the tenant. That provision does not apply if, within the same 18 month period, the tenant is notified in writing that the costs have been incurred and that he will subsequently be required under the terms of his lease to contribute to them by payment of a service charge (s.20B(2)). In Brent LBC v Shulem B Association Ltd [2011] 1 WLR 3014, the High Court held that the “demand” for the purposes of s.20B(1) had to be a contractually valid demand. That decision was approved – without argument to the contrary – in Skelton v DBS Homes (Kings Hill) Ltd [2017] EWCA Civ 1139.’
Landmark Chambers, 2nd June 2020
Source: www.landmarkchambers.co.uk
‘Another Upper Tribunal decision to add to the now large pile of cases on airbnb/short let use and breach of lease. In this case, the FTT had found the short let use not to be in breach of lease (for cunning reasons I’ll come back to) and the head lessor had appealed to the Upper Tribunal. The decision upholds the Nemcova line on “private residence” use, but also has a finding of interest on “business use”.’
Nearly Legal, 6th June 2020
Source: nearlylegal.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2025