Getting section 146 notices right: Anders v Haralambous – Hardwicke Chambers

Posted February 14th, 2014 in appeals, covenants, leases, news, repossession by sally

‘Despite the 146 notice having been around, in one form or another, for more than 130 years, it is still causing as much angst as ever. The High Court appeal in Anders v Haralambous [2013] EWHC 2676 (QB), in which John de Waal QC acted for the Respondent, highlights the added complication of the interaction between s146 and the determination of breach pursuant to s168 of the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002.’

Full story

Hardwicke Chambers, 4th February 2014

Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk

Comments Off

Buzzoni and others v Revenue and Customs Comrs – WLR Daily

Posted January 22nd, 2014 in covenants, inheritance tax, law reports, leases by sally

Buzzoni and others v Revenue and Customs Comrs [2013] EWCA Civ 1684; [2014] WLR (D) 13

‘Whether property disposed of by way of gift was enjoyed to the entire or virtually entire exclusion of any benefit to the donor by contract or otherwise, and whether it constituted property “subject to a reservation” within the meaning of section 102(1)(b) of the Finance Act 1986 for the purposes of inheritance tax under the Inheritance Act 1984, depended not on whether the donor had obtained a benefit from the gifted property but whether the donee’s enjoyment of that property remained exclusive. If the benefit to the donor had no impact on, was irrelevant to and made no or virtually no difference to the donee’s enjoyment, the donee’s enjoyment was to the entire or virtually entire exclusion of any benefit to the donor and, therefore, the gifted property would be an exempt transfer and not subject to inheritance tax.’

WLR Daily, 19th December 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off

Elwood v Goodman and others – WLR Daily

Posted September 6th, 2013 in appeals, contracts, covenants, land registration, law reports, roads by tracey

Elwood v Goodman and others: [2013] EWCA Civ 1103;   [2013] WLR (D)  342

“The burden in equity of a positive covenant did not require to be registered in order to bind successors in title of the original covenantor.”

WLR Daily, 4th September 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off

Leasehold repair covenants and damages – NearlyLegal

Posted June 28th, 2013 in covenants, damages, leases, news, repairs by tracey

“Hunt & Ors v Optima (Cambridge) Ltd & Ors [2013] EWHC 681 (TCC).
This is a brief note on what was a complex case arising out of what, by any measure, appears to have been a very poor construction and subsequent maintenance of a new build block of flats. As will become clear, I’m rather troubled by some of the Court’s findings.”

Full story

NearlyLegal, 25th June 2013

Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk

Comments Off

Not in my court – NearlyLegal

Posted June 7th, 2013 in covenants, forfeiture, housing, leases, news by tracey

“Forfeiture is, for the most part, beloved by landlords and hated/feared by tenants. For what might be relatively minor breaches of covenant, you can lose your lease and the landlord make an enormous windfall. The legislative trend is (slowly) in favour of restricting (and possibly even abolishing) forfeiture as demonstrated by s.168, Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002. By s.168, Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002, a landlord may not serve a notice under s.146, Law of Property Act 1925, or otherwise exercise a right of re-entry (i.e. forfeiture) in respect of a breach of a covenant (other than one to pay rent – which is unaffected by s.146, see s.146(11); or service/administration charges, which are dealt with under s.81, Housing Act 1996), unless the breach has been admitted by the tenant or determined by a court, LVT or arbitral tribunal.”

Full story

NearlyLegal, 3rd June 2013

Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk

Comments Off

Burr v OM Property Management Ltd – WLR Daily

Burr v OM Property Management Ltd: [2013] EWCA Civ 479;   [2013] WLR (D)  164

“When determining the amount of any service charge payable by a tenant for services supplied, on the natural and ordinary meaning of the words of section 20B of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, ‘costs’ were not ‘incurred’ on the mere provision of the services or supplies made to the landlord or management company.”

WLR Daily, 3rd May 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off

Conservation covenants – Law Commission

Posted March 28th, 2013 in consultations, covenants, environmental protection, press releases by tracey

“We have opened a consultation asking whether England and Wales should adopt conservation covenants.”

Full press release and consultation

Law Commission, 28th March 2013

Source: www.justice.gov.uk/lawcommission

Comments Off

Daejan Investments Ltd v Benson and others – WLR Daily

Daejan Investments Ltd v Benson and others [2013] UKSC 14; [2013] WLR (D) 94

“Where a landlord’s failure to consult fully with tenants before carrying out major repairs to a block of flats would preclude recovery from the tenants of the full cost of the works unless a leasehold valuation tribunal granted a dispensation under section 20ZA(1) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 from the relevant consultation requirement, dispensation was not to be refused as a punitive measure solely because a landlord had breached the consultation requirements in the Service Charges (Consultation Requirements) (England) Regulations (SI 2003/1987)) but rather the tribunal could grant the dispensation on terms which reflected the actual prejudice which the tenants had suffered.”

WLR Daily, 6th March 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off

Lloyds TSB Foundation for Scotland v Lloyds Banking Group plc – WLR Daily

Posted January 24th, 2013 in banking, charities, contracts, covenants, law reports, Supreme Court, taxation by sally

Lloyds TSB Foundation for Scotland v Lloyds Banking Group plc [2013] UKSC 3; [2013] WLR (D) 19

“In construing a contractual provision, where there had been an unforeseeable and fundamental change in the legal context since the execution of the contract, the proper approach was to adopt a meaning which best gave effect to the parties’ original intentions and purposes. Where, therefore, a deed executed in 1997 provided for payment to be made by a banking group to a charitable foundation by reference to the group’s pre-tax profit or loss shown in the audited accounts, and a change in accounting practice subsequently required the group consolidated income statement to include, as a profit, a sum representing an unrealised gain on acquisition, the inclusion of such a sum was to be ignored for the purposes of calculating the amount payable to the foundation under the deed.”

WLR Daily, 23rd January 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off

Discharging leasehold covenants – NearlyLegal

Posted July 17th, 2012 in covenants, leases, news by sally

“Restrictive covenants are, in broad terms, contractual restrictions imposed on the current user/owner of land, often imposed by a former owner of the same land (e.g. Mr A sells a field to Mr B, but includes a covenant preventing Mr B from building flats on it). These covenants can, clearly, become onerous or otherwise unnecessary with the passage of time. The Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) has a discretionary power (s.84, Law of Property Act 1925) to modify or discharge these covenants in certain circumstances. The most common ground is s.84(1)(aa), which applies if the removal of the covenant would support a reasonable use of the land and any inconvenience can be met by a payment of money.”

Full story

NearlyLegal, 17th July 2012

Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk

Comments Off

K/S Victoria Street v House of Fraser (Stores Management) Ltd and others – WLR Daily

Posted August 1st, 2011 in assignment, covenants, law reports, leases by tracey

K/S Victoria Street v House of Fraser (Stores Management) Ltd and others [2011] EWCA Civ 904;  [2011] WLR (D)  265

“Any contractual arrangement contained in a tenancy (or a prior agreement ), which imposed an obligation on an existing or prospective guarantor of the tenant’s liabilities to guarantee the liabilities of a future assignee, would be void by reason of section 25(1) of the Landlord and Tenant (Covenants) Act 1995 because it frustrated the operation of section 24(2) of that Act, by which the original tenant’s guarantor was released from his obligation on the assignment of the tenancy. Similarly, a contractual arrangement contained in a later document, for instance, a renewal obligation imposed on a guarantor of an assignee’s liabilities in an assignment or a licence to assign, would be invalid.”

WLR Daily, 27th July 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off

Easements, Covenants and Profits à Prendre – Law Commission

Posted June 8th, 2011 in covenants, easements, Law Commission, profits a prendre, reports by tracey

“In this report, we make recommendations to simplify, modernise and enhance the law of easements, covenants and profits à prendre.  These rights are essential to the effective use of land and are relied upon by a significant proportion of property owners in England and Wales.”

Full report

Law Commission, 8th June 2011

Source: www.justice.gov.uk/lawcommission

Comments Off

Grand v Gill – WLR Daily

Posted May 25th, 2011 in covenants, landlord & tenant, law reports, repairs by sally

Grand v Gill [2011] EWCA Civ 554; [2011] WLR (D) 172

“Plasterwork was part of the structure of a property, rather than being decoration.
The Court of Appeal so held in a reserved judgment in allowing an appeal brought by the tenant, Tanya Grand, against the decision of Judge Karsten QC who, on 7 May 2009 at the Central London County Court, when awarding the tenant damages against the landlord, Param Gill, for breach of leasehold covenant in relation to a lease of a flat at 9B Marlborough Parade, Uxbridge Road, Hillingdon, had not included any sum in respect of plaster damage.”

WLR Daily, 19th May 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

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

Comments Off

Daejan Investments Ltd v Benson and Others – WLR Daily

Posted February 1st, 2011 in covenants, landlord & tenant, law reports, service charges by sally

Daejan Investments Ltd v Benson and Others [2011] EWCA Civ 38; [2011] WLR (D) 24

“The proper exercise of the discretion in section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (as inserted) to dispense with the requirement of consultation laid down in the Service Charges (Consultation Requirements) (England) Regulations 2003 did not depend on financial consequences for the landlord or tenant of granting or refusing such a dispensation.”

WLR Daily, 31st January 2011

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.

Comments Off

Multi-millionaire couple lose court battle over sea view – Daily Telegraph

Posted October 26th, 2010 in covenants, news by sally

“The only field separating them from the waterside was protected from development by a covenant stating it could be ‘used only for the grazing of animals’.”

Full story

Daily Telegraph, 26th October 2010

Source: www.telegraph.co.uk

Comments Off

Good Harvest Partnership LLP v Centaur Services Ltd – WLR Daily

Posted February 25th, 2010 in covenants, guarantees, landlord & tenant, law reports by sally

Good Harvest Partnership LLP v Centaur Services Ltd [2010] EWHC 330 (Ch); [2010] WLR (D) 48

“The Landlord and Tenant (Covenants) Act 1995 precluded a person who had guaranteed a tenant’s obligations under a lease from being required to give a further guarantee in respect of an assignee of the lease.”

WLR Daily, 24th February 2010

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.

Comments Off

Clarence House Ltd v National Westminster Bank plc – WLR Daily

Posted January 27th, 2009 in assignment, covenants, law reports, leases by sally

Clarence House Ltd v National Westminster Bank plc [2009] EWHC 77 (Ch); [2009] WLR (D) 22

“By entering into a ‘virtual assignment’ of leasehold office premises, under which all the economic benefits and burdens of the relevant lease, including any management responsibilities, were transferred to a third party, but without any actual assignment of the leasehold interest or any change in the actual occupancy of the premises in question, the tenant acted in breach of the standard form alienation covenants contained in the lease.”

WLR Daily, 26th January 2009

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.

Comments Off

Cantrell v Wycombe District Council – Times Law Reports

Posted October 10th, 2008 in covenants, housing, law reports by sally

Cantrell v Wycombe District Council

Court of Appeal

“An agreement by a housing association with a local authority to house council-nominated tenants in its property was a positive obligation which could not be enforced against a subsequent buyer of the property.”

The Times, 10th October 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.

Comments Off