Bedford v Paragon Asra Housing Ltd (Landlord and Tenant – Breach of Covenant – Shared Ownership Lease): UTLC 28 Oct 2021

Shared ownership lease – unlawful sub-letting – application for determination of breach of covenant – defence of waiver by acceptance of rent with knowledge of breach – tenant applying to strike out proceedings – whether FTT wrong to refuse to strike out – s.168, Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 – appeal dismissed

[2021] UKUT 266 (LC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 01 December 2021; Ref: scu.669242

Eastern Pyramid Group Corporation Sa v Spire House Rtm Company Ltd: CA 9 Nov 2021

This appeal is about the procedure which tenants in a block of flats must use if they wish to exercise their right under s79 of the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 to take away from the landlord the right to manage the property.

Lord Justice Birss
[2021] EWCA Civ 1658
Bailii
England and Wales

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 01 December 2021; Ref: scu.669730

Eaton Mansions (Westminster) Ltd v Stinger Compania De Inversion SA: ChD 9 Jul 2010

[2010] EWHC 1725 (Ch)
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal fromEaton Mansions (Westminster) Ltd v Stinger Compania De Inversion Sa CA 18-May-2011
The freeholder sought an order for the tenant to remove an air conditioning plant which it said was a trespass against the freehold. . .
See AlsoEaton Mansions (Westminster) Ltd v Stinger Compania De Inversion SA CA 30-Oct-2013
. .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 30 November 2021; Ref: scu.460454

Eaton Mansions (Westminster) Ltd v Stinger Compania De Inversion SA: CA 30 Oct 2013

[2013] EWCA Civ 1308, [2014] HLR 4, [2014] 1 P and CR 5, [2014] CP Rep 12, [2013] 45 EG 74, [2014] 1 EGLR 89
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
See AlsoEaton Mansions (Westminster) Ltd v Stinger Compania De Inversion SA ChD 9-Jul-2010
. .
See AlsoEaton Mansions (Westminster) Ltd v Stinger Compania De Inversion Sa CA 18-May-2011
The freeholder sought an order for the tenant to remove an air conditioning plant which it said was a trespass against the freehold. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 30 November 2021; Ref: scu.517233

Eaton Mansions (Westminster) Ltd v Stinger Compania De Inversion Sa: CA 18 May 2011

The freeholder sought an order for the tenant to remove an air conditioning plant which it said was a trespass against the freehold.

[2011] EWCA Civ 607
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal fromEaton Mansions (Westminster) Ltd v Stinger Compania De Inversion SA ChD 9-Jul-2010
. .

Cited by:
See AlsoEaton Mansions (Westminster) Ltd v Stinger Compania De Inversion SA CA 30-Oct-2013
. .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 30 November 2021; Ref: scu.439821

Pas Property Services Ltd v Hayes: UTLC 27 Jan 2014

UTLC LANDLORD AND TENANT – service charges – whether cost of common heating system can be recovered as service charge or pursuant to a covenant to pay for gas used or consumed – method of apportionment – only heating common parts recoverable as service charge – cost of heating apartments recoverable pursuant to separate covenant – only reasonable method of apportionment is by monitoring meters – appeal dismissed

Her Honour Judge Alice Robinson
[2014] UKUT 26 (LC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 30 November 2021; Ref: scu.521507

SCMLLA (Freehold) Ltd Re Cleveland Mansions, and Southwold Mansions: UTLC 11 Feb 2014

UTLC LANDLORD AND TENANT – service charges – costs – section 20C, Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 – jurisdiction to make an order in favour of tenants not identified in application – failure to give notice of application to respondent – waiver of procedural irregularity – appeal allowed

Martin Rodger QC, Deputy President
[2014] UKUT 58 (LC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 30 November 2021; Ref: scu.521512

Sussex Villas Ltd v Wan and Another: UTLC 28 Jan 2014

UTLC LANDLORD AND TENANT – service charges – interpretation of lease – reserve fund – costs of proceedings – LVT misled by mistaken consensus – s.20C Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 – appeal allowed

Martin Rodger QC, Deputy President
[2014] UKUT 29 (LC)
Bailii
Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 20C
England and Wales

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 30 November 2021; Ref: scu.521508

Columbia House Properties (No3) Ltd v Imperial Hall RTM Company Ltd: UTLC 30 Jan 2014

UTLC LANDLORD AND TENANT – right to manage – claim for landlord’s costs incurred in connection with a notice of claim to acquire the right to manage – whether LVT entitled to conclude no costs incurred – adequacy of reasons – appeal allowed – s.88 Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002

Her Honour Judge Alice Robinson
[2014] UKUT 30 (LC)
Bailii
Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 88
England and Wales

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 30 November 2021; Ref: scu.521505

Albion Residential Ltd v Albion Riverside Residents RTM Company Ltd: UTLC 14 Jan 2014

UTLC LANDLORD AND TENANT – right to manage – block of flats forming part of larger development – whether premises a self-contained building – whether structurally detached – appurtenant property – whether RTM acquired – whether point not taken in counter-notice may be relied on in opposition to RTM claim – Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 ss 72 and 84 – appeal allowed

Martin Rodger QC, Deputy President and P R Francis FRICS
[2014] UKUT 6 (LC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 30 November 2021; Ref: scu.521504

Scottish and Newcastle Plc v Raguz: CA 24 Jul 2003

Leases had been granted. They had been assigned to the defendant who had assigned them again. The last assignee became insolvent and statutory demands were served on the claimant under the 1995 Act for rent. The claimant paid the sums due and now sought them from the defendant. He countered that his obligation under the 1925 Act was as guarantor, and that his obligation might be discharged by a claimant’s wrongful act.
Held: The 1925 Act implied an obligation of indemnity, and was unaffected by any act of the claimant.
The indemnity applied also to any VAT charged to the rent: ‘The original lease constituted a contract for a relevant supply by the landlord to the tenant for which the rent covenanted to be paid was consideration. In view of the terms of s. 89(3) it is indisputable that when the lessor opted to tax the supply there was a change in the VAT charged on that supply. That change occurred before the supplies with which this claim is concerned were rendered. Accordingly the express terms of s. 89(1) requires VAT at the relevant rate to be added to the rent as part of the consideration for the supply by the Lessor to the Tenant. In my view it follows that the default of the Tenant in paying the rent including the VAT thereon falls within the terms of the implied covenant because it constitutes a failure to pay the rent ‘by and in the registered lease reserved and contained’ as amended in accordance with s. 89(1).’

Lord Justice May Lord Justice Sedley The Vice-Chancellor
[2003] EWCA Civ 1070, Times 09-Sep-2003, [2004] LandTR 11
Bailii
Land Registration Act 1925 24(1), Landlord & Tenant (Covenants) Act 1995
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedYeoman Credit Ltd v Latter CA 1961
The distinction between contracts of guarantee and indemnity are real and important and to be retained. . .
CitedHarris v Boots Cash Chemists (Southern) Ltd ChD 30-Jun-1904
The case concerned the question whether an original lessee could enforce by injunction against a successor in title to the term, a provision in a lease precluding alteration without consent. The ground on which he sought to do so was a covenant by . .
CitedButler Estates Company Ltd v Bean CA 1942
. .
CitedAllied London Investments Ltd v Hambro Life Assurance Ltd (No 2) ChD 1984
The lessors sued the original lessees for rent due under the lease after the term had been assigned to another. The lessors had given a licence to assign and the licence contained a guarantee from a third party to the lessors that the assignee would . .
CitedRPH Ltd v Mirror Group (Holdings) Ltd 1993
. .

Cited by:
See AlsoScottish and Newcastle Plc v Raguz CA 6-Mar-2007
The claimant was the original tenant under two 99 year underleases granted in 1967, and assigned them to the defendant who then himself assigned them. The eventual assignee had become insolvent. The landlord recovered the rents from the claimant who . .
See AlsoScottish and Newcastle Plc v Raguz ChD 27-Jul-2004
The claimant had previously assigned its interest in a lease to the defendant, who had in turn re-assigned it. The eventual tenant became insolvent, and the landlord had recovered sums from the claimant who now sought an indemnity under the covenant . .
See AlsoScottish and Newcastle Plc v Raguz ChD 11-Apr-2006
The defendant had taken assignments of the term of two underleases from the claimant, and then re-assigned them to a limited company with guarantors of the rent, and they in turn re-assigned the leases. The last company became insolvent. The . .
See AlsoScottish and Newcastle Plc v Raguz HL 29-Oct-2008
The lease had been assigned by the claimant to the defendant and on again to a tenant who became insolvent. The landlord had recovered sums said to be due from the claimant who now sought an indemnity from the defendant. The defendant said that the . .
CitedMason v Boscawen ChD 18-Dec-2008
The landlord had opted to charge VAT on part of the rent. The tenant fell into arrears and now challenged a notice to quit which included the VAT. The court was asked what constituted ‘rent’ for the purposes of a demand for rent founding a notice to . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant, Registered Land

Updated: 30 November 2021; Ref: scu.184868

Butler Estates Company Ltd v Bean: CA 1942

[1942] 1 KB 1, [1941] 2 All ER 793
England and Wales
Citing:
ApprovedHarris v Boots Cash Chemists (Southern) Ltd ChD 30-Jun-1904
The case concerned the question whether an original lessee could enforce by injunction against a successor in title to the term, a provision in a lease precluding alteration without consent. The ground on which he sought to do so was a covenant by . .
Appeal fromButler Estates Company Ltd v Bean KBD 1941
. .

Cited by:
CitedScottish and Newcastle Plc v Raguz CA 24-Jul-2003
Leases had been granted. They had been assigned to the defendant who had assigned them again. The last assignee became insolvent and statutory demands were served on the claimant under the 1995 Act for rent. The claimant paid the sums due and now . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 30 November 2021; Ref: scu.186112

Harris v Boots Cash Chemists (Southern) Ltd: ChD 30 Jun 1904

The case concerned the question whether an original lessee could enforce by injunction against a successor in title to the term, a provision in a lease precluding alteration without consent. The ground on which he sought to do so was a covenant by the successor in title in the usual form to observe and perform the covenants etc. contained in the lease. ‘There is nothing in the structure or language of the usual covenant which suggests that whilst the term is vested in the assignee the obligation to the assignor is one of indemnity, but on a subsequent assignment by him it changes into an obligation of guarantee. The single promise that the assignee and those deriving title under him would perform the covenants in the lease does not suggest that two separate obligations, different in nature, are being undertaken. The actual language used is that of indemnity: and the common understanding of conveyancers is that there exists a chain of indemnities. This established understanding of the nature of the assignee’s obligation mirrors the established understanding of the original tenant’s obligation. The original tenant’s obligation to pay rent does not become a contract of guarantee when he assigns the term.’

Warrington J
[1904] 2 Ch 376
Commonlii
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedScottish and Newcastle Plc v Raguz CA 24-Jul-2003
Leases had been granted. They had been assigned to the defendant who had assigned them again. The last assignee became insolvent and statutory demands were served on the claimant under the 1995 Act for rent. The claimant paid the sums due and now . .
ApprovedButler Estates Company Ltd v Bean CA 1942
. .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant

Leading Case

Updated: 30 November 2021; Ref: scu.186110

Morshead Mansions Ltd v Di Marco: CA 12 Feb 2014

The court was asked whether it had power to award a mandatory injunction to enforce against a landlord its obligations to provide information about service charges to tenants under the 1985 Act.
Held: The landlord’s appeal failed. The principle remedy was that provided by criminal enforcement.

Patten, Lewison, Sharp LJJ
[2014] EWCA Civ 96, [2014] 2 All ER 773, [2014] 1 P andCR 20, [2014] CP Rep 22, [2014] L and TR 13, [2014] 1 WLR 1799, [2014] HLR 28, [2014] WLR(D) 74
Bailii, WLRD
Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 21
England and Wales

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 29 November 2021; Ref: scu.521159

Innerspaces Self Storage Ltd v Harding and Others: CA 30 Jan 2014

The court was asked whether the presence of a heap of rubble on part of an industrial estate retained by the respondent landlord constituted a breach by it of a covenant to perform certain services throughout the term of a lease relating to another part of the estate.

Moses, Black, Gloster LJJ
[2014] EWCA Civ 46
Bailii
England and Wales

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 29 November 2021; Ref: scu.520803