The tenant occupied a flat under a long lease at a low rent. She was entitled to acquire the freehold on payment of a premium and after following the procedure under the Act. The landlord served a purported counter notice which did not state in terms (as it had to) whether the right to acquire the extension lease was or was not admitted. She claimed the counter-notice was invalid. She appealed a judgment that the notice was valid since she should have seen that the landlord admitted her claim.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The counter-notice was integral to the process, and was to assist the tenant in knowing just which parts of her notice were at issue. The counter-notice failed to achieve that. Nor did it achieve effect under other subsections.
Sir Murray Stuart-Smith, Chadwick LJ
Gazette 29-Nov-2001, Gazette 17-Jan-2002, [2001] EWCA Civ 1712, [2002] Ch 256, [2002] 2 WLR 1172, [2002] 1 P and CR DG16, [2002] 06 EG 156, [2002] 1 EGLR 61, [2002] 1 All ER 144, [2002] L and TR 19, [2002] HLR 45, [2001] NPC 166, [2001] 48 EGCS 128
Bailii
Leasehold Reform Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 42 49
England and Wales
Citing:
Applied – Speedwell Estates Limited and Covent Garden Group Limited v Jane Rush Dalziel and others CA 31-Jul-2001
Tenants sought to purchase the freehold reversion of their properties under leasehold enfranchisement. The landlord objected that the forms were incomplete and invalid. The tenants accepted that there were defects, but asserted that these were not . .
Cited by:
Cited – Trafford Metropolitan Borough Council v Total Fitness UK Ltd CA 18-Oct-2002
The landlord served a notice to quit. It gave a date calculated by reference to the notice period, but then stated the date on which it expired. Under the rule in Lester, the notice period only began on the day after service, and that resulted in a . .
Applied – Raymere Ltd v Belle Vue Gardens Ltd CA 17-Jul-2003
Tenants of a block of flats sought enfranchisement. The landlord said the notices were defective in that the office copies supplied did not show the entitlement of the persons giving notice at the relevant time.
Held: The scheme for collective . .
Cited – M25 Group Limited v Tudor and others CA 4-Dec-2003
Tenants served notices under the Act requiring information about the disposal of the freehold. The landlords objected that the notices were invalid in failing to give the tenants’ addresses as required under the Act.
Held: The addresses were . .
Cited – Lay and others v Ackerman and Another CA 4-Mar-2004
Notices had been served by tenants under the Acts. The properties were on a large estate where the freeholds had been divided and assigned to different bodies, and there were inconsistencies in identifying the landlords. The landlords served a . .
Cited – Andrews and Another v Cunningham CA 23-Jul-2007
The elderly appellant claimed a non-shorthold assured tenancy. He had moved in in 1999, but had been given a rent book which described the tenancy as an assured tenancy. The now deceased landlord had himself occupied another flat in the building. . .
Cited – Mclaughlin v University of Ulster NIIT 1-Feb-2011
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 29 September 2021; Ref: scu.166937 br>