Search Results for: Leasehold Reform Act 1967 19

Click the case name for better results:

Cadogan v McGirk: CA 25 Apr 1996

The court considered whether the 1993 Act should be construed as expropriatory legislation and therefore was to be read strictly. Held: The Court rejected the submission that the relevant provisions must be strictly construed because the 1993 Act was expropriatory in nature. Millet LJ said: ‘It would, in my opinion, be wrong to disregard the … Continue reading Cadogan v McGirk: CA 25 Apr 1996

In re Dulwich College Estate’s Application: 1974

The Court approved an estate management scheme under s19. Citations: (1974) 231 EG 845 Statutes: Leasehold Reform Act 1967 19 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Kent and Another v Kavanagh and Another CA 2-Mar-2006 The parties owned properties part of a building estate. The properties had been held under leases, but those … Continue reading In re Dulwich College Estate’s Application: 1974

Personal Representatives of W R Rees Davies Deceased v City of Westminster: CA 27 Aug 1998

Citations: [1998] EWCA Civ 1415 Statutes: Leasehold Reform Act 1967 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: At Lands Tribunal – Rees-Davies v Lord Mayor and Citizens of the City of Westminster LT 31-Dec-1994 . . Leave to appeal – Personal Representatives of W R Rees-Davies Deceased v City of Westminster CA 7-May-1998 Application for leave to … Continue reading Personal Representatives of W R Rees Davies Deceased v City of Westminster: CA 27 Aug 1998

Sharpe v Duke Street Securities: 1987

The court considered an application for leasehold enfranchisement where a doorway had been constructed between the two ground-floor halls and the tenant of the two maisonettes occupied both together as his residence. Two residential units may constitute a single house although they were purpose-built for separate occupation and have always been in separate occupation, with … Continue reading Sharpe v Duke Street Securities: 1987

Duke of Westminster and Others v Birrane: CA 17 Nov 1994

A basement extending under the house next door means that the property with the basement is not a not a dwelling-house for leasehold enfranchisement purposes. The result would create difficulties with flying freeholds. ‘The primary purpose of section 2(2) must have been to exclude from the operation of the Act houses in respect of which … Continue reading Duke of Westminster and Others v Birrane: CA 17 Nov 1994

Malpas v St Ermin’s Property Ltd: CA 1992

Judges: Dillon LJ Citations: [1992] 1 EGLR 109 Statutes: Leasehold Reform Act 1967 2(1) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Malekshad v Howard de Walden Estates Limited HL 5-Dec-2002 A house and an adjoining building had been first demised under one lease, then separated vertically. Two separate residential properties now existed. Held: The … Continue reading Malpas v St Ermin’s Property Ltd: CA 1992

Estates Governors of Alleyn’s College v Williams: ChD 14 Jan 1994

A scheme had been approved by the court under the Act, conferring management powers on managers. They were to consider applications for permission to construct new buildings, such consent not to be unreasonably withheld. Held: It was for the freeholder managers to show that his refusal of consent for a development is unreasonable. If the … Continue reading Estates Governors of Alleyn’s College v Williams: ChD 14 Jan 1994

Collin v Duke of Westminster: CA 1985

In 1975 the tenant sought to exercise his right to purchase the freehold reversion of his property. The landlord argued that the rent payable precluded any such entitlement. Under the law as then understood, the landlord’s contention appeared correct. The leaseholder proceeded no further. In 1980 the law was clarified so as to indicate that … Continue reading Collin v Duke of Westminster: CA 1985

Clarise Properties Ltd, Re Appeal Against Decision of Leasehold Valuation Tribunal: UTLC 17 Jan 2012

LEASEHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT – dwellinghouse – price – whether correction certificate validly issued – held it had not – whether freehold to be valued in two stages or three – three stage approach held to be appropriate – capitalisation rate for modern ground rent – deferment rate – appeal allowed – price increased to pounds 12,600 … Continue reading Clarise Properties Ltd, Re Appeal Against Decision of Leasehold Valuation Tribunal: UTLC 17 Jan 2012

Central Estates (Belgravia) Ltd v Woolgar: CA 1972

A lessee made a claim to acquire the freehold of his house under the 1967 Act. The making of such a claim prevented the landlord from forfeiting the lease unless lessee had not made his claim in good faith. Lord Denning MR said: ‘To my mind, under this statute a claim is made ‘in good … Continue reading Central Estates (Belgravia) Ltd v Woolgar: CA 1972

Custins v Hearts of Oak Benefit Society: LT 1969

The tribunal was asked to value a freehold on the tenant seeking to acquire the reversion under the 1967 Act. Held: The actual tenant could be treated as being in the market as a potential purchaser of the freehold when assessing a price payable under section 9(1). Citations: (1969) 209 EG 239 Statutes: Leasehold Reform … Continue reading Custins v Hearts of Oak Benefit Society: LT 1969

Hynes v Twinsectra Ltd: CA 8 Mar 1995

After dismissal of forfeiture case by consent, the lease is fully restored for the purposes of enfranchisement. Citations: Ind Summary 22-May-1995, Times 08-Mar-1995 Statutes: Leasehold Reform Act 1967 Part I Jurisdiction: England and Wales Landlord and Tenant Updated: 08 May 2022; Ref: scu.81579

Lloyd-Jones v Church Commissioners for England: 1982

The tenant’s lease had about twelve years unexpired and was at a rent of andpound;45 per annum. The valuation of the landlord’s reversionary freehold interest involved two stages. The first stage was to assess the so-called investment value of the landlord’s interest. This had two components. The first was the right to receive the rent … Continue reading Lloyd-Jones v Church Commissioners for England: 1982

Dennis and Robinson Ltd v Kiossos Establishment: CA 1987

Section 9(1A) of the 1967 Act makes no express reference to a ‘willing buyer’, but it is implied by the assumption of a sale in the ‘open market’. Judges: Fox LJ Citations: [1987] 1 EGLR 132 Statutes: Leasehold Reform Act 1967 9(1A) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Earl Cadogan v Pitts and … Continue reading Dennis and Robinson Ltd v Kiossos Establishment: CA 1987

Tandon v Trustees of Spurgeons Homes: HL 1982

Tenants sought enfranchisement of their properties, but 75% of building consisted of a shop, and only 25% was living accomodation. Held: The tenants were entitled to buy the freehold. The question whether a building is a house ‘reasonably so called’ is one of law. The House made two particular points of general application on the … Continue reading Tandon v Trustees of Spurgeons Homes: HL 1982

Sequent Nominees Ltd (Formerly Rotrust Nominees Ltd) v Hautford Ltd: SC 30 Oct 2019

The tenant promised in the lease not to apply for any planning permission without the consent of the landlord, not to be unreasonably withheld. The tenant wished to apply for planning permission for a change of use of part of the demised premises, from business to residential use, but the landlord refused consent on the … Continue reading Sequent Nominees Ltd (Formerly Rotrust Nominees Ltd) v Hautford Ltd: SC 30 Oct 2019