‘Retailer Marks and Spencer (M&S) must repay over £1 million to the landlord of its former head office after the Court of Appeal ruled that it was not entitled to reclaim rent and other charges covering the period after it exercised a break clause.’
OUT-LAW.com, 15th May 2014
Source: www.out-law.com
‘The government has said letting agents in England face a new obligation to display full details of their fees both on their websites and in their offices.’
BBC News, 14th May 2014
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘2013 was a difficult year for claimant disrepair. Changes in legal aid funding have made it all but impossible to pursue a disrepair claim under legal aid alone, as funding is only available for an order to carry out repairs to where there is serious risk to health or well being of the tenant or other occupiers, and not for further repairs or the damages claim (although full funding remains for a counterclaim to a possession claim, which can be brought after the possession order).’
NearlyLegal, 13th April 2014
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
‘As the number of people becoming homeless from private sector accommodation continues to rise, and as private sector accommodation is used for discharge of duty and temporary accommodation by Councils, the issue of affordability becomes more and more important. Both intentional homeless decisions and suitability decisions can rest on affordability.’
NearlyLegal, 7th April 2014
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
‘Tenant evictions are a thorny subject. On one side tenants say they are often evicted illegally, without reason, and far too often. On the other, landlords complain that ousting troublesome tenants is expensive and time-consuming. We’ve looked at two evictions – one from a landlord’s point of view and the other from the tenant’s, and offered a guide to your rights – whichever side you are on.’
The Guardian, 5th April 2014
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘Public law principles allow you to challenge a decision of a public authority if the consultation process preceding it was unfair. Unfairness comes in many shapes and sizes, but the commonest one alleged is that it was not carried out at the formative stage. The authority had already made up enough of its mind so the consultation process ceased to mean anything – it was just going through the motions.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 28th March 2014
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘Many commercial landlords will be delighted with the Court of Appeal’s unanimous decision in Jervis v Pillar Denton Limited (Game Station) and Others [2014] EWCA Civ 180, overruling the decisions in Goldacre and Luminar. The Court of Appeal held that, applying the Lundy Granite principle, the question of whether quarterly rent due under a lease was an administration expense or a provable debt depended not on whether the rent fell due during the period of the administration, but whether the property had been used for the benefit of the administration. Sarah Clarke gives the background to these cases, sets out the Game appeal decision and highlights its consequences as well as the real concerns for officeholders.’
11 Stone Buildings, February 2014
Source: www.11sb.com
‘In the context of insolvency, where rent was payable in advance the office holder should make payments at the rate of the rent for the duration of any period during which he retained possession of the demised property for the benefit of the winding up or administration. The rent would be treated as accruing from day to day. Those payments were payable as expenses of the winding up or administration. The duration of the period was a question of fact and was not determined merely by reference to which rent days occurred before, during or after that period.’
WLR Daily, 24th February 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘Court of Appeal ruling gives high street landlords more protection in administrations’
Daily Telegraph, 24th February 2014
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘I admit that SS v Birmingham CC [2013] UKUT 418 (AAC) has been on my to do list for a while and that, possibly, the main reason for finding the time to write it up is because I’m on a two hour strike (#fairpayinHE). But, it is a really quite important case about the application of the unreasonably high rent rule for “exempt accommodation” in Reg 13 and Sch 3 of the 2006 Housing Benefit regs. The principal question of law concerns the meaning of “suitable alternative accommodation” in those regs.’
NearlyLegal, 23rd January 2014
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
‘The guarantor of an insolvent commercial tenant cannot be held liable for outstanding obligations if changes were made to the lease without its consent which had the “potential” to increase the burden on the guarantor, the Court of Appeal has confirmed.’
OUT-LAW.com, 23rd January 2014
Source: www.out-law.com
‘A s.202 review decision on affordability was at the centre of this second appeal, brought by Birmingham after a s.204 appeal decision went against them. The issue was to what extent the review decision should manifest attention to the statutory guidance (the July 2006 Guidance) on affordability.
NearlyLegal, 15th December 2013
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
‘One of a couple of cases on intentional homelessness and affordability of accommodation.’
NearlyLegal, 24th November 2013
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk/blog/
‘Hurzat v Hounslow LBC (2013) CA (Civ Div) 21 November 2013. What is the relationship between Housing Act 1996 Part VII and Children Act 2004? Does the duty under s.11 Children Act to safeguard and promote the welfare of children have a bearing on decisions on intentional homelessness under Housing Act 1996? While this case provides a partial answer, it was not, I think, a great case on the facts for testing the interplay of the Acts.’
NearlyLegal, 24th November 2013
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk/blog/
“A tenant’s option to determine a commercial lease (a ‘break clause’) is a common feature of the modern landlord and tenant relationship. As a result of the weak economy and the ability of tenants to determine unilaterally an unfavourable lease on terms, there have recently been a number of reported decisions concerning the disputed exercise of break clauses. The typical interests in conflict have been described in Canonical UK Ltd v TST Millbank LLC [2012] EWHC 3710 (Ch) by Vos J (para 3): ‘This is a hard case for both sides. The tenant company … needs to know if it has successfully broken the lease because its future business depends on using its resources elsewhere. The landlord in these poor economic times seeks to use any argument it properly can to keep its building tenanted.'”
Full story (PDF)
New Square Chambers, 31st October 2013
Source: www.newsquarechambers.co.uk
“Buy-to-let landlords are threatening to take legal action against what they say are unjustified interest rate rises.”
BBC News, 26th October 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“The Prevention of Social Housing Fraud Act comes into force tomorrow (Tuesday 15 October 2013) in England only. The text of the Act is here. A key point is the introduction of ‘Unlawful Profit Orders’, which get around the decision of the Court of Appeal in Sumal v Newham London Borough Council [2012] EWCA Crim 1840 that confiscation of rent was not possible because ‘the continued receipt of the rent was not the product of the appellants crime’. (Admittedly that was a prosecution for an unlicensed property in a selective licensing area under section 95(1) of the Housing Act 2004, but the point about confiscation not being enabled under statute had broader application).”
NearlyLegal, 14th October 2013
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
“Four councils are taking legal advice to challenge Mayor Boris Johnson’s decision by which affordable rents can be set at up to 80% of market prices.”
BBC News, 8th September 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“Liz Davies considers the ways in which landlords have benefited from the credit crisis and explores how tenants could be given increased security through five-year tenancies.”
Garden Court Chambers Blog, 30th July 2013
Source: www.gclaw.wordpress.com
“A recent case in the Chancery Division is the latest in a series concerning payment of rent as a condition of exercising a break clause: Marks & Spencer Plc v BNP Paribas Securities Services Trust Co (Jersey) Ltd [2013] EWHC 1279; [2013] 22 EG 92. In this series of cases, tenants have sought to overcome the apparent unfairness of paying quarterly rent due in advance as a condition of exercising a break clause part way through a quarter, leading to an overpayment of rent when compared pro rata to the period of actual occupancy.”
Hardwicke Chambers, 15th July 2013
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2024