Category: leases

Sloane Stanley v Mundy and others – Tanfield Chambers

Posted July 12th, 2016 in housing, leases, news, tribunals, valuation by sally

‘The claims involved the valuation of premiums under the Leasehold Reform Housing and Urban Development Act 1993. The UTLC listed three applications for the specific purpose of considering the validity of a hedonic regression model (“the Parthenia model”) to determine leasehold relativity. The Tribunal indicated the approach to be adopted for assessing relativity for different lease lengths and commented on the use of published relativity graphs.’

Full story

Tanfield Chambers, 21st June 2016

Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk

Management Issues at Mixed-Use Developments – Tanfield Chambers

Posted July 12th, 2016 in consultations, covenants, enfranchisement, housing, leases, news, service charges by sally

‘By their very nature, mixed-use developments involve multiple parties with competing interests. This often leads to disputes regarding the management of the estate and the cost of maintaining it and, ultimately, to leaseholders wanting to take control (either by exercising the right to collective enfranchisement or the right to manage).’

Full story

Tanfield Chambers, 10th June 2016

Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk

Stamp Duty Land Tax – Tanfield Chambers

Posted July 12th, 2016 in enfranchisement, housing, leases, news, stamp duty, taxation by sally

‘Does the 3% second home surcharge apply to statutory lease extensions and enfranchisement under the 1993 and 1967 Acts?’

Full story

Tanfield Chambers, 6th June 2016

Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk

Timothy Taylor Ltd v Mayfair House Corpn and another – WLR Daily

Posted June 3rd, 2016 in covenants, landlord & tenant, law reports, leases by sally

Timothy Taylor Ltd v Mayfair House Corpn and another [2016] EWHC 1075 (Ch)

‘The tenant occupied the ground and basement floors of a building from which it operated a gallery. The lease contained terms reserving the landlord’s right to build and a covenant for quiet enjoyment. In order to carry out works on the adjoining upper floors of the building, the landlord erected scaffolding, which enveloped the building, restricting access to the tenant’s gallery and giving the impression that it was closed. The works also caused substantial noise in the tenant’s premises. No financial compensation was offered by the landlord to the tenant for the works undertaken.’

WLR Daily, 10th May 2016

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Deferment Rate Revisited – Tanfield Chambers

Posted June 2nd, 2016 in enfranchisement, housing, leases, news, tribunals, valuation by sally

‘The deferment rate is a key input in every enfranchisement claim whether it relates to the enfranchisement of a house, block of flats or the extension of a flat lease. The current deferment rate was set by the Lands Tribunal in Earl Cadogan v Sportelli [2007] 1 EGLR 153. This article explains what the deferment rate is and how the Tribunal arrived at the value which has been universally adopted since the decision in Sportelli. It then explores the status of the decision in Sportelli and asks whether it is time to re-set the deferment rate. The last part of the article looks at deferment rates for shorter leases.’

Full story

Tanfield Chambers, 31st May 2016

Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk

Beware of residential rights – Tanfield Chambers

Posted June 2nd, 2016 in housing, landlord & tenant, leases, news by sally

‘With the constant cry for more housing, commercial developers are increasingly including residential flats in their plans. Whether they are converting offices into homes or building new mixed-use schemes, developers must be aware of the raft of rights that residential tenants enjoy which are not available to commercial tenants. With some careful planning, some of these rights can be avoided.’

Full story

Tanfield Chambers, 31st May 2016

Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk

Practical advice on forfeiture – Hardwicke Chambers

Posted April 27th, 2016 in civil procedure rules, forfeiture, housing, landlord & tenant, leases, mortgages, news, repossession, service, service charges, time limits by sally

‘The tail-end of 2015 threw up one of those London bus-type quirks where in less than a fortnight I acted for a landlord, a lessee and a mortgagee in three cases concerning, at least in part, the issues of (a) service of forfeiture proceedings, and (b) the defendant’s non-attendance at the first hearing at which a possession order was made.’

Full story

Hardwicke Chambers, 19th April 2016

Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk

Saving the bank’s security after it is too late… – Tanfield Chambers

Posted April 26th, 2016 in banking, forfeiture, landlord & tenant, leases, news, setting aside by sally

‘It is a requirement of the court rules that when a landlord seeks to forfeit a residential lease by issuing a claim in court, that claim must be served on a mortgagee. The purpose of this provision is to make sure that the bank is able to apply for relief from forfeiture (and hence reinstate its security) before it is too late. But what happens if the bank is served with the claim, the tenant and the bank do not attend the hearing, the lease is forfeited and the possession order subsequently enforced with the result that title is closed and the bank loses its security?’

Full story

Tanfield Chambers, 21st April 2016

Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk

Moorjani v Durban Estates – Tanfield Chambers

Posted April 26th, 2016 in appeals, damages, housing, landlord & tenant, leases, news, repairs by sally

‘Housing practitioners are familiar with the routine claim for disrepair in respect of short-life tenancies. However, such claims are rarely encountered with long residential leases and whilst they are unlikely to raise any particular problems with liability, they may do so as regards causation and the quantification of damages. This can be seen by considering the two main types of damage sustained.’

Full story

Tanfield Chambers, 19th April 2016

Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk

Sinclair Gardens Investments (Kensington) Ltd v Ray [2015] EWCA Civ 1247 – Tanfield Chambers

Posted April 26th, 2016 in appeals, evidence, judgments, leases, news, valuation by sally

‘A previous decision of the Upper Tribunal is admissible evidence of what it decided and it is a question of what weight a subsequent tribunal should give it. The extent to which the previous decision is a decision on general points of interest rather than specific facts and the cogency of the reasoning will impact on the weight to be given to a particular decision.’

Full story

Tanfield Chambers, 19th April 2016

Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk

Replacing carpets owned by landlord was not breach of repair clause, says Court of Appeal – OUT-LAW.com

Posted April 25th, 2016 in appeals, damages, interpretation, landlord & tenant, leases, news, repairs by sally

‘A commercial property tenant did not breach repair covenants set out in the lease when it replaced carpet tiles in the property with strip carpeting, the Court of Appeal has ruled, overturning the High Court’s decision.’

Full story

OUT-LAW.com, 21st April 2016

Source: www.out-law.com

The impact of new consumer regulations – Hardwicke Chambers

Posted April 13th, 2016 in consumer protection, contracts, drafting, EC law, landlord & tenant, leases, news by sally

‘On 1 October 2015 the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (“CRA”) came into force. CRA superseded the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (“UTCCR”). The CRA aims to modernise, simplify and consolidate key parts of consumer law; it is the cornerstone of an extensive consumer law reform programme. Anyone acting in a landlord and tenant dispute or drafting tenancy or lease agreement needs to be familiar with its provisions’

Full story

Hardwicke Chambers, 11th March 2016

Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk

Commercial Landlord & Tenant Law – New Square Chambers

Posted April 13th, 2016 in appeals, apportionment, contracts, interpretation, landlord & tenant, leases, news, rent, Supreme Court by sally

‘In 2011, Marks and Spencer plc (“M&S”) operated a “break clause” in commercial leases of office premises. Following determination, M&S sought to recover from the landlord advance quarterly rent that it had paid for the period after the successful break. M&S relied, in part, on an implied term claim that post-break rent should be returned to it. The landlord denied the claim and litigation ensued. Morgan J in the High Court gave judgment for M&S on the claim. The Court of Appeal unanimously reversed the judgment. The Supreme Court unanimously dismissed M&S’ appeal and re-stated the principles for the implication of contract terms: Marks and Spencer plc v BNP Paribas Securities Services Trust Co (Jersey) Ltd[2015] UKSC 72, [2015] 3 WLR 1843.’

Full story

New Square Chambers, 11th April 2016

Source: www.newsquarechambers.co.uk

High Court: commercial tenant cannot assign lease to its guarantor – OUT-LAW.com

Posted March 23rd, 2016 in assignment, guarantees, insolvency, landlord & tenant, leases, news by tracey

‘Anti-avoidance provisions in the 1995 Landlord and Tenant (Covenants) Act prevent a tenant from assigning a lease to its guarantor, the High Court has ruled.’

Full story

OUT-LAW.com, 21st March 2016

Source: www.out-law.com

A laundrette by any other name smells less sweet – Hardwicke Chambers

Posted March 22nd, 2016 in contracts, covenants, leases, news by sally

‘This Q&A deals with user clauses in commercial leases. What is permitted by a covenant permitting use solely as a laundrette? Does such a clause permit the provision of dry-cleaning services?’

Full story

Hardwicke Chambers, 21st March 2016

Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk

High Court: commercial tenant cannot assign lease to its guarantor – OUT-LAW.com

Posted March 22nd, 2016 in landlord & tenant, leases, news by sally

‘Anti-avoidance provisions in the 1995 Landlord and Tenant (Covenants) Act prevent a tenant from assigning a lease to its guarantor, the High Court has ruled.’

Full story

OUT-LAW.com, 21st March 2016

Source: www.out-law.com

Revenue and Customs Commissioners v Apollo Fuels Ltd and others – WLR Daily

Posted March 21st, 2016 in employment, HM Revenue & Customs, income tax, law reports, leases, remuneration, tribunals by tracey

Revenue and Customs Commissioners v Apollo Fuels Ltd and others; [2016] EWCA Civ 157

‘The employers leased cars to their employees to enable them to carry out their duties. The cars were leased on arm’s length commercial terms, including lease charges at full market value. The revenue concluded that the provision of the cars was a taxable benefit, for the purposes of the Income Tax (Earnings and Pensions) Act 2003, and served notices of assessment for that tax on the employees. The First-tier Tribunal allowed the employees’ appeal, holding that the provision of the cars was a “benefit” which fell within section 114 of the 2003 Act with the result that Chapter 6 of Part 3 of the 2003 Act applied. That decision was affirmed by the Upper Tribunal.’

WLR Daily, 17th March 2016

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

A Hawarden Kite – Nearly Legal

Posted March 1st, 2016 in covenants, forfeiture, housing, leases, news, tribunals by sally

‘Forfeiture of (residential) long leases is a controversial subject: on the one hand, it’s clear that there has to be a practical and accessible route for landlords to enforce covenants, whether as to payment of monies or more general “management” covenants (e.g. stopping people just removing load bearing walls); but, on the other, the potential for an enormous (and almost always disproportionate) benefit to the landlord if the lease actually is forfeited is pretty hard to justify. Moreover, as a result of both the general drafting techniques in long leases and some [ahem] interesting Court of Appeal decisions, there is a pretty good case that a landlord can recover his legal and professional costs of pursuing forfeiture matters, even if the breach is trivial or if relief would be granted.’

Full story

Nearly Legal, 29th February 2016

Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk

Sharing the Spoils – Tanfield Chambers

Posted February 24th, 2016 in covenants, insurance, interpretation, landlord & tenant, leases, news by sally

‘It is not uncommon for a lease to impose an obligation on one party or another to insure the subject property against the usual insured risks. But difficult questions can arise when the party placing the insurance is not the party in occupation. When and to what extent can the proceeds be shared? And what impact does such an arrangement have on damage caused by the occupier’s negligence?’

Full story

Tanfield Chambers, 9th February 2016

Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk

Collective Enfranchisement: Validity of Notices – Tanfield Chambers

Posted January 13th, 2016 in enfranchisement, landlord & tenant, leases, news by sally

‘Chapter I of Part I of the 1993 Act confers on certain tenants of flats held under long residential leases in certain premises the right to collective enfranchisement, that is to say the right to have the freehold of those premises acquired on their behalf by a person appointed by them for that purpose and at a price determined in accordance with Schedule 6 to the 1993 Act. Tenants entitled to participate in collective enfranchisement are called “qualifying tenants”. The premises must comprise two or more flats held by qualifying tenants. The total number of flats held by such tenants must be not less than two thirds of the total number of flats contained in the premises’

Full story

Tanfield Chambers, 7th January 2016

Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk