Category: Landlord and Tenant

Gray and others v Taylor: CA 2 Apr 1998

A right of occupation given by an almshouse under a charitable trust was an occupation under a licence without right of possession, not an assured tenancy. The plaintiff’s conditions of occupancy stated: ‘Residents are licensees and pay a contribution towards the cost of providing accommodation at the Court: residents are not tenants and do not pay rent.’
Held: The tenant’s appeal failed and she did not have an assured tenancy. There had been no intention to create a tenancy: ‘A person who is selected as an almsperson becomes a beneficiary under the trusts of the charity and enjoys the privilege of occupation of rooms in the almshouses as a beneficiary. It is, in my judgment, wholly immaterial that, in this case, the appellant pays a weekly sum towards the cost of maintaining the almshouses and the essential services therein. ‘ and ‘the weekly contribution paid by the almsperson goes towards the discharge of costs falling on the trustees, thereby liberating income of the charity for other purposes, including the maintenance of a reserve fund and the improvement and extension of the almshouses. The weekly charge is not rent payable under a tenancy. Indeed, it is historically the case that, until comparatively recently, almspersons were not required to pay any weekly sum. The introduction of a weekly sum came with the introduction of housing benefit, to which almspersons would normally be entitled; payment of a weekly sum not exceeding the housing benefit would not result in any net loss to the almsperson and in effect the housing benefit would be available to the charity. ‘

Judges:

Nourse LJ, Mummery LJ, Sir John Vinelott

Citations:

Gazette 20-May-1998, Times 24-Apr-1998, [1998] EWCA Civ 603, [1998] L and TR 50, [1998] 4 All ER 17, , [1998] 1 WLR 1093

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1988 1

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Street v Mountford HL 6-Mar-1985
When a licence is really a tenancy
The document signed by the occupier stated that she understood that she had been given a licence, and that she understood that she had not been granted a tenancy protected under the Rent Acts. Exclusive occupation was in fact granted.
Held: . .
Cited – Allan v Liverpool Overseers 1874
The court was asked whether a steamship company was liable to be rated in respect of its occupation of sheds which it occupied under a licence from the Mersey Docks and Harbour Board. The court noted that liability for rates fell only on a person . .
Cited – Errington v Errington and Woods CA 19-Dec-1951
There was a contract by a father to allow his son to buy the father’s house on payment of the instalments of the father’s Building Society loan.
Held: Denning LJ reviewed the cases and said: ‘The result of all these cases is that, although a . .

Cited by:

Cited – Watts v Stewart and Others CA 8-Dec-2016
The court considered the status of residents of almshouses, and in particular whether they were licensees or tenants with associated security.
Held: The occupier’s appeal failed: ‘We do not accept the proposition that, if and insofar as Mrs . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 18 November 2022; Ref: scu.80991

Brickfield Properties Ltd v Botten: UTLC 14 Mar 2013

UTLC LANDLORD AND TENANT – variation of leases – Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 Part IV as amended – service charges – proportionate contributions totalling less than 100% of relevant costs – section 35(2)(f) and (4) – whether order under section 38 varying the leases can be effective from a date earlier than the date of application to the leasehold valuation tribunal.

Judges:

Huskinson J

Citations:

[2013] UKUT 133 (LC)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 35

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 17 November 2022; Ref: scu.472936

Jackson v The Free Grammar School of John Lyon: UTLC 18 Feb 2013

UTLC LEASEHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT – house – freehold enfranchisement price – whether LVT double counted a premium to reflect property’s location in value per square foot for the freehold – whether LVT failed to make allowance for development risk, planning risk and planning costs in assessing development value – Leasehold Reform Act 1967 s.9(1)(C) – appeal allowed in part – Enfranchisement price andpound;1,536,000

Citations:

[2013] UKUT 52 (LC)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Leasehold Reform Act 1967 9(1)(c)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 17 November 2022; Ref: scu.472932

London Borough of Lewisham v Rey -Ordieres and Others: UTLC 28 Jan 2013

UTLC LANDLORD AND TENANT – service charges – disputed on-costs and management fee under PFI contract – whether costs reasonably incurred – whether preliminaries should be reduced by ratio of leasehold to tenanted dwellings – whether allowance for contractor’s profit reasonable – whether duplication of management charge – whether 10% reasonable management fee – whether management fee should be charged on on-costs – appeal allowed in part

Citations:

[2013] UKUT 14 (LC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 17 November 2022; Ref: scu.472927

Voyazides v Eyre and Others: UTLC 22 Jan 2013

UTLC LEASEHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT – house – price – freehold value – whether comparable to be analysed as an existing house or development site – effect on value of school development site and proximity of ambassador’s residence – leasehold value – relativity – valuation method – graphs or deduction for benefit of Act from single comparable market transaction – LVT valuation upheld – appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2013] UKUT 13 (LC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 17 November 2022; Ref: scu.472928

Corscombe Close Block 8 Rtm Co Ltd v Roseleb Ltd: UTLC 21 Feb 2013

UTLC LANDLORD AND TENANT – right to manage – service of notice of intention to participate on qualifying tenant – definition of qualifying tenant – ‘long lease’ and shared ownership lease – interpretation of s76(2) Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002

Citations:

[2013] UKUT 81 (LC)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 76(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 17 November 2022; Ref: scu.472930

Kullar and Another v Kingsoak Homes Ltd: UTLC 26 Feb 2013

UTLC LANDLORD AND TENANT – service charges – whether costs reasonably incurred – appeal and cross appeal as to whether LVT wrongly failed to have regard to relevant matters – proper construction of service charge provision as to recovery of managing agents fees – whether LVT unfairly took a decision on grounds never raised before it – Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 s.19 and s.20C

Citations:

[2013] UKUT 15 (LC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 17 November 2022; Ref: scu.472933

Carey-Morgan and Another v De Walden and Another: UTLC 14 Mar 2013

UTLC LANDLORD AND TENANT – service charges – cost of employing full time resident caretaker – employment of such a caretaker not needed for the enjoyment of the building – however employment of such a caretaker needed to remedy breach of covenants in headlease – headlessee seeking to recover costs of employing such a caretaker (and notional loss of market rent of basement flat) through service charge – construction of lease – effect of sections 18 and 19 Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 as amended

Citations:

[2013] UKUT 134 (LC)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 18 19

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 17 November 2022; Ref: scu.472938

Johnson and Others v Old: CA 23 Apr 2013

The court was asked whether (as the appellant contends) a payment made at the commencement of the tenancy, pursuant to a requirement in the tenancy agreement that ‘The first six months rent are to be paid in advance’, must be treated as a ‘tenancy deposit’ for the purposes of section 212(8) of the Housing Act 2004.

Judges:

Arden, Jackson LJJ, Sir John Chadwick

Citations:

[2013] EWCA Civ 415

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 2004 212(8)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Landlord and Tenant, Housing

Updated: 17 November 2022; Ref: scu.472897

Warman v Faithfull: 25 Jan 1834

An instrument in writing, whereby A agreed to let premises to B, for seven, fourteen, or twentyone years (commencing at Christmas Day then next), at the option of B, at the yearly rent of 241., payable quarterly, the first payment to be made at the ensuing Lady-Day, free of rates and taxes; and whereby B. stipulated, if he should be desirous of putting an end to the agreement at either of the terms before specified, to give six months’ notice; and that he, B, should pay all the expences of preparing a lease for either of the terms above stated :-is a lease, and not a mere agreement for a lease.

Citations:

(1834) 5 B and Ad 1042, [1834] 110 ER 1078, [1834] EngR 472

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Truro Diocesan Board of Finance Ltd v Foley CA 22-Oct-2008
The tenant appealed against a decision that a deed he had entered into with the claimant did not operate to give him the status of a protected or statutory tenancy.
Held: The tenant had had a full Rent Act tenancy. The Board claimed . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 14 November 2022; Ref: scu.296312

Earl Cadogan, Cadogan Estates Limited v Search Guarantees Plc: CA 27 Jul 2004

The tenant of a house had subdivided it and let off the flats. He sought to acquire the freehold.
Held: Where none of the subtenants themselves had qualifying leases, the head tenant could be in sufficient occupation to be able to buy the freehold.

Judges:

The Hon Mr Justice Laddie Lord Justice Jonathan Parker

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Civ 969, Times 03-Aug-2004, [2004] 1 WLR 2768, [2005] 1 All ER 280

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Leasehold Reform Act 1967 1(1ZB), Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 101(b)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Hanlon v The Law Society HL 1981
The House considered the impact of the statutory charge under the 1974 Act in matrimonial proceedings.
Held: The costs in respect of which the statutory charge bit were the costs of the whole divorce proceedings and not just the financial . .
Cited – Crean Davidson Investments Ltd v Earl Cadogan 1998
A headlessee can be a ‘qualifying tenant’ for the purposes of Chapters 1 and 2 of Part 1 of the 1993 Act. . .
Cited – Pittalis v Grant CA 1989
A point was raised for the first time on appeal.
Held: Though an appellate court could exclude a pure question of law which had not been raised at first instance from being raised on appeal, the usual practice was to allow it to be taken where . .
Cited – Graysim Holdings Ltd v P and O Property Holdings Ltd HL 24-Nov-1995
A market hall had been let to a tenant under a lease. The tenant fitted out the entire hall with stalls and entered into agreements with the stallholders, by which they paid the tenant a rent and service charge for services provided by the tenant. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 14 November 2022; Ref: scu.199563

RFW Coppen and others (Trustees of the Thames Ditton Lawn Tennis Club) v Bruce-Smith: CA 27 Mar 1998

Opposition too new tenancy – whether landlord had intention to redevelop

Citations:

[1998] JPL 1077, [1998] EG 55, [1998] EWCA Civ 564, [1998] 77 PandCR 239, (1998) 76 P and CR D7, (1999) 77 P and CR 239

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Landlord and Tenant Act l954

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Dillner, Regina (on The Application of) v Sheffield City Council Admn 27-Apr-2016
The claimant challenged the policy of the respondent council to replace many established trees along streets in the City.
Held: Permission to apply for review was refused: ‘Some concern has been expressed by objectors to the scheme that, in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 14 November 2022; Ref: scu.144042

Matthews v Pournasrollahzadeh and Another: CA 9 Mar 1998

The tenant fell into arrears, and discussed a surrender with the landlord. It had been intended that the landlord would waive any arrears, but he then claimed that there had been an implied surrender by law, and that the arrears remained.
Held: At the time when the surrender took place, there was in place no agreement to waive arrears. There had been an agreement that the tenant should be released from future obligations. However a clause preserved the debt as against the appellant, and that debt remained.

Citations:

[1998] EWCA Civ 425

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Oastler v Henderson 1877
The tenancy was for seven years. Shortly after its creation, the tenant left the keys with the agent and asked him to dispose of it or make the best bargain for surrender he could, and left for America. A tenant not being found, the agent returned . .
Cited – In re EWA, A Debtor CA 1901
The general rule is that where an obligation is joint and several, the release of one of two joint debtors has the effect of releasing the other, but: ‘It is clear that, although a document in terms purports to release one of two joint debtors, yet . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 14 November 2022; Ref: scu.143903

Bacchiocchi v Academic Agency Limited: CA 20 Feb 1998

The ‘continuous occupation’ required of a tenant to support a claim for disturbance on the non-renewal of his lease under the Act is not to be lost for the normal incidents of business life. The tenant had anticipated the non-renewal of the tenancy and had closed his restaurant business in the last few weeks before the tenancy ended.
Held: It was unnecessary, in establishing rights under the 1954 Act, that there should be any physical presence in the premises, provided the premises were being used in connection with a business activity.
Simon Brown LJ said: ‘whenever business premises are empty for only a short period, whether mid-term or before or after trading at either end of the lease, I would be disinclined to find that the business occupancy has ceased (or not started) for that period provided always that during it there exists no rival for the role of business occupant and that the premises are not being used for some other, non-business purpose. That to my mind is how Part II of the 1954 Act should operate in logic and in justice. It has nothing to do with the de minimis principle. Rather it is a recognition that the tenant’s business interests will not invariably require permanent physical possession throughout the whole term of the lease and he ought not to have to resort to devices like storage of goods or token visits to satisfy the statutory requirements of continuing occupation. If, of course, premises are left vacant for a matter of months, the court would be readier to conclude that the thread of continuity has been broken.’

Judges:

Simon Brown LJ, Ward LJ, Moore-Bick J

Citations:

Times 03-Mar-1998, Gazette 25-Mar-1998, [1998] EWCA Civ 308, [1998] 2 All ER 241, [1998] 1 WLR 1313, (1999) 78 P and CR 276, [1998] L and TR 151, [1998] 3 EGLR 157

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 38(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Graysim Holdings Ltd v P and O Property Holdings Ltd HL 24-Nov-1995
A market hall had been let to a tenant under a lease. The tenant fitted out the entire hall with stalls and entered into agreements with the stallholders, by which they paid the tenant a rent and service charge for services provided by the tenant. . .
Cited – Wandsworth London Borough Council v Singh CA 1991
The Local Authority were lessees of some 500 square metres of public open space at St. Johns Hill in Wandsworth, which they and their horticultural sub-contractors visited periodically. It had been used by local inhabitants for leisure and . .
Cited – I and H Caplan Limited v Caplan No. 2 ChD 1963
For some months whilst the tenants’ right to a new tenancy was being litigated they had ceased trading and had vacated the premises. They then succeeded before the Court of Appeal and started trading from the premises afresh. Their protection under . .
Cited – Morrison’s Holdings Limited v Manders Limited CA 1976
The tenants had to cease trading after a fire next door. They asked the landlords to reinstate and said they wished then to resume trading. Following the landlord’s demolition and reconstruction of the premises the tenants sought a new tenancy.
Cited – Hancock and Willis v GMS Syndicate Limited CA 1983
The solicitor tenants moved to larger premises and for six months licensed the subject premises to others save for the wine cellar and save that they reserved to themselves the right to use the dining area twice a month.
Held: The thread of . .

Cited by:

Cited – Pointon York Group Plc v Poulton CA 13-Jul-2006
The lease included a right to use seven designated parking spaces. The parties disputed whether parking space could be occupied in such a way as to be given protection under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954.
Held: A parking space is an . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 14 November 2022; Ref: scu.143786

Calcott v JS Bloor (Measham) Ltd: CA 26 Feb 1998

The conversion of an agricultural tenancy for less than year, to a tenancy from year to year, operated from the original agreement date, not the end of period of the first tenancy. The application of the section to the tenancy meant that the tenancy began immediately and the terancy was determinable accordingly on the anniversary.

Citations:

Times 05-Mar-1998, Gazette 01-Apr-1998, Gazette 26-Feb-1998

Statutes:

Agricultural Holdings Act 1986 2(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Agriculture, Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 14 November 2022; Ref: scu.78833

Adagio Properties Limited v Ansari: CA 22 Jan 1998

The requirement on a landlord to specify the breach in a s146 notice, did not require each specific detail to be given; the notice must give the tenant however opportunity to remedy the defects. The landlord had become concerned that the tenant was not acting in accordance with the lease, but had not been allowed access.
Held: The requirement was for the tenant to be told of what repair was required but not how it was to be undeertaken. The judge confused the duty to specify the particular breach complained of, which the landlord is obliged to do, and giving particulars of the breach complained of which he is not obliged to do. The breach of the covenant in this case was very clear. The flat was divided into two. The notice clearly specifies the breach. It was therefore good.

Citations:

Gazette 04-Feb-1998, [1998] EWCA Civ 49

Statutes:

Landlord and Tenant Act 1925 146

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Jolly v Brown CA 1914
‘The Act of Parliament provides that a right of re-entry or forfeiture for breach of covenant in a lease shall not be enforceable unless the lessor serves on the lessee a notice specifying the particular breach complained of, and if the breach is . .
Cited – Fox v Jolly HL 1916
The House referred to a schedule of repair served on the tenant: ‘Now the schedule is attacked on several grounds. It is said that it does not tell the tenant what it is he ought to do in order to remedy the breach of which complaint is made. I am . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 13 November 2022; Ref: scu.143527

Bell and others v General Accident Fire and Life Assurance Corporation Ltd: CA 11 Dec 1997

The court was asked: ‘whether a company which has granted a lease of business premises in circumstances which would ordinarily mean that the provisions of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 (‘the Act’) applied can invoke s. 24 A of that Act even though it did not have title to the premises the subject of the lease at the time of the demise. Put rather more widely, the question is whether a tenant by estoppel of business premises can invoke the protection of the Act.’
Mummery LJ said: ‘the juristic basis and the legal effect of the estoppel doctrine were authoritatively expounded in the Court of Exchequer by Martin B in Cuthbertson v Irving . . in terms applicable to this case . . The result is also consistent with the legal effect of the satellite doctrine of ‘feeding the estoppel’ . . which applies when an interest in the land is acquired by the person deficient in title at the time of the grant from which the estoppel arose: ‘so that, as Hale put it, ‘by purchase of the land, that is turned into a lease in interest, which before was purely an estoppel”: see Holdsworth’s History of English Law, vol VII, p 246.’

Judges:

Beldam, Hutchison, Mummery LJJ

Citations:

[1997] EWCA Civ 2962, [1997] EG 174, [1998] 1 EGLR 69, [1998] 17 EG 144, [1998] L and TR 1

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 24A

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Scott v Southern Pacific Mortgages Ltd and Others SC 22-Oct-2014
The appellant challenged a sale and rent back transaction. He said that the proposed purchaser had misrepresented the transaction to them. The Court was asked s whether the home owners had interests whose priority was protected by virtue of section . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant, Estoppel

Updated: 13 November 2022; Ref: scu.143361

Burton v Camden London Borough Council: CA 15 Jan 1998

A deed of release executed by one joint tenant in favour of the other did not bind the landlord. Save that in a periodic tenancy the old tenant would be released on the next renewal.

Citations:

Times 15-Jan-1998, Gazette 28-Jan-1998

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Housing, Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 13 November 2022; Ref: scu.78770

Williams v Lessees of 38 Flats In Vista: UTLC 6 Apr 2020

Landlord and Tenant – Service Charges – apportionment of liability for service charges – wording in lease rendered void by section 27A(6) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 – effect of lease once void wording deleted

Citations:

[2020] UKUT 111 (LC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 13 November 2022; Ref: scu.649793

Westmacott and Others v Ackerman: UTLC 20 Nov 2012

UTLC LEASEHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT – houses converted to flats – price payable for freehold – whether valuation must assume a sale of freehold reversion on the valuation date – held that it must – yield to be adopted for valuation on investment basis – relativity – appeal dismissed – Leasehold Reform Act 1967 s9(1A)

Citations:

[2012] UKUT 415 (LC)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Leasehold Reform Act 1967 9(1A)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 13 November 2022; Ref: scu.470516

Johnson v County Bideford Ltd: UTLC 17 Dec 2012

UTLC LANDLORD AND TENANT – service charges – invalid demand because name of landlord not given – whether made valid for purposes of operation of section 20B by later valid demand – section 20C decision – whether reasons adequate – whether discretion properly exercised – appeal and cross-appeal dismissed – Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 ss 20B and 20C – Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 s 47

Citations:

[2012] UKUT 457 (LC)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 27A

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 13 November 2022; Ref: scu.470518

Hackney v Akhondi: UTLC 10 Dec 2012

UTLC LANDLORD AND TENANT – service charges – whether costs of major works and administration charge reasonable and/or reasonably incurred – apportionment – consultation arrangements – capital works programme in accordance with PPC 2000 Contracting Arrangements – s. 20C order – Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 sections 19(1), 20 and 27A – appeal allowed

Citations:

[2012] UKUT 439 (LC)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 19(1) 20 27A

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 13 November 2022; Ref: scu.470517

Sadd v Brown (Landlord and Tenant : Service Charges): UTLC 5 Jan 2013

UTLC LANDLORD AND TENANT – service charges – whether LVT decision on a point not raised with the parties unfair – landlord covenant to insure – whether implied term the insurance premium recoverable from the tenant as a service charge – appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2012] UKUT 438 (LC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 13 November 2022; Ref: scu.470515

Mercia Investment Properties Ltd v Northway: UTLC 20 Nov 2012

UTLC LANDLORD AND TENANT – costs – breach of covenant – LVT determining breach of covenant remedied – costs awarded against landlord – no limit specified – finding that proceedings not vexatious or abuse of process – appeal allowed – Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 Sch 12 para 10

Citations:

[2012] UKUT 419 (LC)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 Sch12-10

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 12 November 2022; Ref: scu.466662

Wales and West Housing Association Ltd v Paine: UTLC 22 Oct 2012

UTLC LANDLORD AND TENANT – service charge – management charges – LVT holding unreasonable – not contended by tenant – no evidence – tribunal relying on own knowledge – held contrary to requirements in Arrowdell – appeal allowed

Citations:

[2012] UKUT 372 (LC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 12 November 2022; Ref: scu.466660

Thirlaway v Masculet and Others: UTLC 29 Oct 2012

UTLC LANDLORD AND TENANT – variation of leases – dwelling house converted to three flats – application by freeholder and two leaseholders for variation of all leases to allow full recovery of costs incurred by freeholder in running block – requested variation order made by LVT – whether object of variation could be satisfactorily achieved if one lease was not varied – held it could not – whether variations would prejudice the remaining leaseholder – held they would not – whether variations were reasonable – held they were – appeal dismissed – Landlord and Tenant Act, 1987 ss 37 and 38

Judges:

N J Rose FRICS

Citations:

[2012] UKUT 302 (LC)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 37 38

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 12 November 2022; Ref: scu.466659

Mchale v Cadogan: LT 30 Oct 2008

LT LEASEHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT – collective enfranchisement – status of appellant as witness – deferment rate – marriage value – whether participating tenants’ interests to be valued without Act rights – caretaker’s flat – whether intermediate lessee entitled to charge rent for this – held Act rights to be left out of account and no right to charge rent for caretaker’s flat – appeal dismissed – Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 Sch 6 para 4.

Citations:

[2008] EWLands LRA – 44 – 2007

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 12 November 2022; Ref: scu.278631

Old Grovebury Manor Farm Ltd v W Seymour Plant Sales and Hire Ltd and Another: CA 21 Jun 1979

The plaintiffs granted a business lease to the defendants for three years. The tenant covenanted not to assign the lease without the written consent of the landlord, such consent not to be unreasonably withheld in the case of a respectable tenant. The tenant assigned the lease without the landlord’s consent. That assignment was effective. The landlord served a section 146 notice to forfeit the lease. The question was whether the notice should be served on the assignee or the original tenant.
Held: If the landlord’s application was granted, the notice would take effect from the day the writ was issued. The assignee was the person interested. The appeal was dismissed.

Judges:

Lord Russell of Killowen, Browne LJ

Citations:

[1979] EWCA Civ 2, 252 EG 1103, [1979] 1 WLR 1397, [1979] 3 All ER 504

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Law of Property Act 1925 146

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Dudley and District Benefit Building Society v Emerson 1949
The court was asked on whom a section 146 notice should be served. There had been a sub-lease granted by a mortgagor which was not binding on the paramount title of the mortgagee.
Held: The mortgagor had not such an estate or interest as . .
Cited – Kanda v Church Commisioners for England 1958
The landlord served a section 146 notice for breach of a repairing covenant. The lease had been assigned.
Held: The notice should be served on the assignee. . .
Cited – Church Commissioners for England v Ve-Ri-Best Manfacturing Co Ltd 1956
The lease provided for re-entry for breach of covenant. The landlord served a notice requiring repairs and payment of compensation on both the tenant and the mortgagee. The mortgagees served a counter-notice, and the landlord proceeded against the . .
Cited – Cusack-Smith v Gold 1958
The landlord wanted to serve a section 146 notice for breach of repairing covennat. The lease had been assigned.
Held: The person who had assigned was not entitled to receive a section 146 notice. Therefore the person on whom the notice should . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 12 November 2022; Ref: scu.245277

Crewe Services and Investment Corporation v Silk: CA 2 Dec 1997

The landlord brought proceedings against the tenant for failure to keep his tenanted farm in a good state of repair. The judge awarded the cost of the landlord doing the repairs himself, making no discount for the possibility that the tenant might in fact remedy the breaches before the end of the tenancy. The tenant appealed.
Held: Since the tenant might decide to repair himself during the term and there was no evidence before the trial judge of the Court of Appeal that the landlord intended to carry out any works of repair at all, the costs of the repairs might be regarded as being a starting point. The court discounted these for the uncertainties as to whether the work would be done. The diminution in the value of a reversion for a tenant’s failure to repair is not represented by the undiscounted cost of repair where the tenancy’s duration is not uncertain. The court gave guidance on what the court should do in the circumstances where the evidential material as to loss is less than ideal.

Judges:

Lord Woolf MR, Millett and Robert Walker LJJ

Citations:

Times 02-Jan-1998, [1997] EWCA Civ 2872, [1998] 35 EG 81

Statutes:

Agricultural Holdings Act 1986, Landlord and Tenant Act 1927 18(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Bonham-Carter v Hyde Park Hotel 1948
A party claiming damage for breach of a covenant to repair in a lease must prove that damage. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Latimer and Another v Carney and others CA 27-Oct-2006
The landlords appealed disissal of their request for relief against their tenants for non-repair of the premises. The judge had held that the landlord had not provided appropriate evidence of the damage and costs of repair which it claimed.
Cited – Latimer and Another v Carney and others CA 27-Oct-2006
The landlords appealed disissal of their request for relief against their tenants for non-repair of the premises. The judge had held that the landlord had not provided appropriate evidence of the damage and costs of repair which it claimed.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Agriculture, Landlord and Tenant, Damages

Updated: 11 November 2022; Ref: scu.79627

Buzzoni and Others v HM Revenue and Customs – FTC/57-59/2011: UTTC 19 Oct 2012

UTTC Whether s. 102(1)(b) of the Finance Act 1986 (gift with reservation) applies to a gift of a reversionary underlease containing covenants from the donee mirroring covenants in the donor’s head lease. Application of Ingram v. IRC. Decision of the First-tier Tribunal upheld: such covenants do constitute a reservation within the section.

Citations:

[2012] UKUT 360 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Finance Act 1986 102(1)(b)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Buzzoni and Others v Revenue and Customs FTTTx 21-Apr-2011
FTTTx INHERITANCE TAX – grant of future underlease – covenants reserved – whether donor excluded or virtually excluded – appeal dismissed . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Buzzoni and Others v Revenue and Customs, Re The Estate of Lia Kamhi (Deceased)) CA 19-Dec-2013
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Inheritance Tax, Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 10 November 2022; Ref: scu.466700

Okonedo v Kirby and Another: LT 9 May 2006

LANDLORD AND TENANT – tenants’ right of first refusal – purchase notice by tenants requiring transfer of freehold – original disposal by gift – whether price payable on transfer should be nil -Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 s 12B

Citations:

[2006] EWLands LRX – 15 – 2006

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 10 November 2022; Ref: scu.241799

Cawsand Fort Management Co Ltd v Stafford and others: CA 21 Feb 2007

Renewed application for permission to appeal.

Citations:

[2007] EWCA Civ 231

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Landlord and Tenant Act 1987

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

At Lands Tribunal – Cawsand Ford Management Co Ltd v Stafford and others LT 7-Nov-2006
LT LANDLORD AND TENANT – appointment of manager – lessees with incorporeal rights over land outside the curtilage of the building – held power to include such land in management order – Landlord and Tenant Act . .

Cited by:

Leave – Cawsand Fort Management Company Ltd v Stafford and others CA 20-Nov-2007
The tenant had sought an order under the 1987 Act for the appointment of a manager of the apartments. The landlord appealed against the order saying that it could not apply to buildings which were not comprised in the buildings containing the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 10 November 2022; Ref: scu.250265

Drewett and Another v Bold and Another: LT 4 May 2006

LANDLORD AND TENANT – Administration Charge – Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 Section 158 and Schedule 11 – jurisdiction of Leasehold Valuation Tribunal – whether ‘payable’ in Schedule 11 means ‘due’ – whether absence of a formal demand from the landlord for payment (being a demand which complies with paragraph 4 of Schedule 11) deprives LVT of jurisdiction to consider the amount payable.

Citations:

[2006] EWLands LRX – 90 – 2005

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 10 November 2022; Ref: scu.241797

Northampton Borough Council v Lovatt and Another: CA 11 Nov 1997

The local authority had obtained a possession order against the defendant tenants because of the behaviour of the tenants’ children as ‘conduct which is a nuisance or annoyance to neighbours’ The question on appeal was whether behaviour which related to properties more than 100 metres away from the house fell within the scope of the section.
Held: Under Simmonds the parents were responsible for the acts of their children. The acts had not however occurred on the premises subject to the order. By a majority, the acts need not occur on the premises.

Judges:

Lord Justice Henry, Lord Justice Pill, Lord Justice Chadwick

Citations:

[1997] EWCA Civ 2693

Statutes:

Housing Act 1985 84(1) Schedule 2

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Kensington and Chelsea Royal London Borough Council v Simmonds CA 15-Jul-1996
A possession order was properly made against a tenant for the misbehaviour of a family member. . .
Cited – Cobstone Investments Limited v Maxim CA 1985
The court considered the meaning of ‘adjoining occupiers’ The tenant suggested that the word ‘ adjoining’ should be read literally so that the premises must be contiguous in the sense of physically joining, or being co-terminous with the holding of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Local Government, Landlord and Tenant, Housing

Updated: 10 November 2022; Ref: scu.143092

Stretch v West Dorset District Council: CA 10 Nov 1997

A local authority has no ability to grant an option to renew a lease, even though it has the power to grant a lease and would benefit from the wrongful grant. The land was held for an express statutory purpose and was not ‘corporate land’ within the Act. The statutory restriction on lettings in excess of seven years without the consent of the Secretary of state could not be worked around by the use of options.

Citations:

Gazette 03-Dec-1997, Times 27-Nov-1997, [1997] EWCA Civ 2692, (1998) 77 P and CR 342

Statutes:

Local Government Act 1933

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appealed to – Stretch v The United Kingdom ECHR 24-Jun-2003
The claimant had taken a lease of property from a local authority. Relying upon an option for renewal, he invested substantially in the property, but it was then decided that the option was ultra vires.
Held: Property rights protected under . .
Cited – Trustees of the Chippenham Golf Club v North Wiltshire District Council 1991
. .
Cited – Chapleo v Brunswick Permanent Building Society 1881
‘persons who deal with corporations or societies that owe their constitution to or have their powered defined or limited by Act of Parliament, or are regulated by deeds of settlement or rules, deriving their effect more or less from Acts of . .
Cited – Westdeutsche Landesbank Girozentrale v Islington London Borough Council CA 30-Dec-1993
A bank paid money to a local authority under an interest rate swap agreement, which was held later to be outside the local authority’s powers.
Held: The local authority was to repay the money paid to it for an ultra vires purpose (a swap . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Stretch v The United Kingdom ECHR 24-Jun-2003
The claimant had taken a lease of property from a local authority. Relying upon an option for renewal, he invested substantially in the property, but it was then decided that the option was ultra vires.
Held: Property rights protected under . .
Cited – Birmingham City Council v Qasim and Others CA 20-Oct-2009
The council argued that the defendant was not a tenant granted to him as a secure tenancy since he had not been granted the tenancy in accordance with its policies. An employee had manipulated the Council’s system to grant tenancies to bypass the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Local Government, Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 10 November 2022; Ref: scu.143091