“An aristocrat whose family name is famed for its link to the Charge of the Light Brigade today failed in a bid to prevent dozens of portraits of his ancestors being sold.”
The Independent, 20th April 2012
Source: www.independent.co.uk
Souglides v Tweedie and another [2012] EWHC 561 (Ch); [2012] WLR (D) 74
“An interest carved out of a superior leasehold or freehold interest could constitute ‘an interest reversionary (whether directly or indirectly)’ on the term of a lease for the purpose of section 9(1) of the Perpetuities and Accumulations Act 1964. Accordingly, an option for a lease extension fell within section 9(1) and so was exempt from the rule against perpetuities.”
WLR Daily, 12th March 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“The decision of the Court of Appeal in Hilmi & Associates Ltd v 20 Pembridge Villas Freehold Ltd [2010] 1 WLR 2750 (CA) highlighted the strict requirements of s 36A of the Companies Act 1985 (and hence the similarly-worded ss 43-47 of the Companies Act 2006 now in force) about companies signing and executing documents. The decision concerns a claim for leasehold enfranchisement, but is of wider importance and is a reminder, assuming that any is required, that statutory notices are very much all or nothing.”
Full story (PDF) see p. 4
New Square Chambers, January 2012
Source: www.newsquarechambers.co.uk
“Despite the parlous state of the residential property market, enfranchisement claims continue to exercise courts and tribunals. This article gives a flavour of what has been generating disputes.”
Full story (PDF)
New Square Chambers, January 2012
Source: www.newsquarechambers.co.uk
Mexfield Housing Co-operative Ltd v Berrisford [2011] UKSC 52; [2011] WLR (D) 322
“An agreement for a term of uncertain duration could not give rise to a tenancy in accordance with its terms but, pursuant to section 149(6) of the Law of Property Act 1925, it could take effect as a lease for 90 years, determinable on the death of the tenant.”
WLR Daily, 9th November 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Smith and another v Jafton Properties Ltd; [2011] EWCA Civ 1251; [2011] WLR (D) 314
“At common law an assignment of part of a leased property by which the leased property was physically severed had the effect that the holder of each severed part had privity of estate with the landlord only in respect of that severed part. In short, as a holder only of part of the land, he was the tenant of that severed part only.”
WLR Daily, 2nd November 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Lovat v Hertsmere Borough Council [2011] EWCA Civ 1185; [2011] WLR (D) 306
“In the definition of ‘an excluded tenancy’ for the purposes of the additional right to enfranchisement applicable to tenancies not at a low rent under section 1AA of the Leasehold Reform Act 1967, the phrase ‘the house which the tenant occupies under the tenancy’ in section 1AA(3)(a) was to be construed as referring solely to the ‘house’ as defined in section 2(1) of the 1967 Act (that is, excluding any grounds); and the term ‘adjoining land’ in section 1AA(3)(b) meant neighbouring land that might, but did not necessarily, touch or physically adjoin the house.”
WLR Daily, 27th October 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“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
“Qualifying tenants on exercise of their right to collective enfranchisement wishing to purchase the freehold interest would have their interests valued on the basis that the rights to enfranchisement did not exist.”
WLR Daily, 22nd December 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.
Mexfield Housing Co-operative Ltd v Berrisford [2010] EWCA Civ 811; [2010] WLR (D) 192
“An occupancy agreement containing uncertain terms as to the period of occupation was not capable of creating an interest in land granting a lease of a property in favour of the occupier and was not enforceable in equity. The fact that a person took exclusive possession of the property and agreed to pay and paid rent monthly for the occupation, could create a monthly tenancy so as to bring the tenancy to an end by serving a notice to quit.”
WLR Daily, 19th July 2010
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.
“A ‘building designed or adapted for living in’ was a ‘house … reasonably so called’ within s 2(1) of the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 if it was constructed as a house for single occupation and the result of the most recent works which altered the building, assessed objectively, was that the property had been adapted for living in, the emphasis being on the physical appearance and character of the property rather than the user.”
WLR Daily, 2nd July 2010
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.
“Lawyers want the rules surrounding leasehold homes to be clarified amid claims some freeholders are charging too much for extensions.”
BBC News, 5th June 2010
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
Court of Appeal
“When a liquidator disclaimed a lease, that did not determine any liability under the lease of the original lessee or of the guarantor in relation to leases or assignments of the leases executed after the Landlord and Tenant (Covenants) Act 1995 had come into force on January 1, 1996, although the liability of the insolvent assignee company had ceased after the disclaimer.”
The Times, 22nd April 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Hammersmith and Fulham London Borough Council v Alexander-David
Court of Appeal
“A local housing authority which granted a tenancy to a minor who was homeless and in priority need held the premises in trust for the minor. For as long as the authority was the trustee, it could not lawfully serve a notice to quit on the minor.”
The Times, 13th April 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Doleman v Shaw [2009] EWCA Civ 283; [2009] WLR (D) 115
“On a true construction of s 178(4) of the Insolvency Act 1986, on the disclaimer of a lease by a liquidator, although the company ceased to be bound by the tenant covenants so far as its own obligations were concerned, it was treated as still bound so far as third party obligations were concerned.”
WLR Daily, 1st April 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.
Landlord Protect Ltd v St Anselm Development Co Ltd; [2009] WLR (D) 72
“Where the landlord’s consent was required to an assignment of a lease, the landlord could not reasonably impose a condition which was designed to increase the rights he enjoyed under the headlease.”
WLR Daily, 27th February 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.
Landlord Protect Ltd v St Anselm Development Co Ltd
Court of Appeal
“Where the head landlord’s consent was required to an assignment of a lease, he could not reasonably impose a condition which was designed to increase the rights he enjoyed under the headlease.”
The Times, 2nd March 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 from the date of publication.
Morshead Mansions Ltd v Leon Di Marco
Court of Appeal
“Where a tenant was a member of the landlord company, that company could recover an amount passed by resolution of the company under its articles to finance anticipated expenditure to maintain the building, even though such a claim was unenforceable under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 The Court of Appeal (Lord Justice Mummery, Lord Justice Wall and Lord Justice Toulson) so stated on December 10, 2008, allowing the appeal of Morshead Mansions Ltd from the decision of Mr Recorder Mitchell, QC, in Central London County Court, dated January 22, 2008, that a resolution of the company passed pursuant to its articles of association to establish a fund of £400,000 to be designated the 2007 Recovery Fund was not enforceable as a service charge within under section 18 of the 1985 Act.”
The Times, 25th February 2009
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.
“Companies which sign over the management of properties they rent without telling their landlord might be in breach of their leases after the High Court ruled in a landlord’s favour in a dispute.”
OUT-LAW.com, 2nd February 2009
Source: www.out-law.com
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.
© Inner Temple Library 2024