‘This case concerns the proper interpretation of certain provisions of that [1993 Act] regime when after a claim to collective enfranchisement has been made and registered, the freeholder grants a 999 year lease of a part of the premises. In a thorough and thoughtful judgment in the Central London County Court, HH Judge Marshall QC held that the lease granted by the freeholder in the circumstance of this case was caught by the anti-avoidance provisions in section 19[1] on several grounds. With leave granted by Peter Smith J, the freeholder appeals against that decision.’
Judges:
Roth J
Citations:
[2010] EWHC 422 (Ch), [2010] 2 EGLR 151, [2010] 3 WLR 1125, [2010] L and TR 13, [2011] 1 P and CR 7, [2010] NPC 33
Links:
Statutes:
Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – 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 . .
Cited by:
Appeal from – Cadogan and Another v Panagopoulos and Another CA 11-Nov-2010
The court was asked whether a caretaker’s flat was within the ‘common parts’ of the relevant premises for the purposes of Part I of the 1993 Act. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Landlord and Tenant
Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.402732
