Houses/Flats – Enfranchisement, Lease Extensions and Compensation for Loss. Application to determine amount to be paid into court under section 9(1) of the 1967 Act. Citations: [2006] EWLVT LON – LV – HEL – 00BE – 0 Links: Bailii Statutes: Leasehold Reform Act 1967 9(1) 21 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Landlord and Tenant Updated: 16 … Continue reading 31 Tower Bridge Road – Southwark : London (Houses/Flats – Enfranchisement, Lease Extensions and Compensation for Loss): LVT 11 May 2006

The applicant claimed the right to purchase the freehold reversion for her home. The defendant said it was not held under a low rent so as to qualify, since the rent exceeded the rateable value as assessed. The rating list had been altered meantime from the two cottages to one combined listing. Held: Looking at … Continue reading Neville v Cowdray Trust Ltd and Another: CA 5 May 2006

Proper construction of the proviso to section 3(1) of the Leasehold Reform Act 1967, and its application to the terms of the relevant lease. Citations: [2002] EWCA Civ 424, [2002] 22 EG 137 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Landlord and Tenant Updated: 07 September 2022; Ref: scu.170106

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

Judges: Carnwath LJ Citations: [2007] EWCA Civ 1280 Links: Bailii Statutes: Leasehold Reform Act 1967 9 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Appeal from – Pitts and Another v Cadogan LT 28-Mar-2007 LT LEASEHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT – preliminary issues -procedure – deferment rate and hope value – whether respondent on appeal entitled to seek addition for hope … Continue reading Cadogan v Pitts and Another: CA 4 Dec 2007

LT LEASEHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT . . preliminary issues – deferment rate – determination of deferment rate – Arbib v Earl Cadogan considered – deferment rate of 4.75% applied to houses and 5% applied to flats – guidance on this ( hope value – whether hope of releasing share of marriage value relevant in collective enfranchisement – … Continue reading Cadogan and Another v Sportelli and Another: LT 15 Sep 2006

The tenant served a notice of its desire to purchase the freehold. The landlord objected that the property was no longer a house as required under the Act, having become dilapidated and unoccupied. Held: The nature of the occupancy was to be tested as at the date of the issue of the notice and not … Continue reading Boss Holdings Ltd and Another v Grosvenor West End Properties Ltd: CA 21 Mar 2006

LT LEASEHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT – house – terms of transfer – restrictive covenants – new building and alterations – Leasehold Reform Act 1967, ss 8(1), 10(4)(b)(i) and (5)(a) Citations: [2005] EWLands LRA – 2 – 2005 Links: Bailii Statutes: Leasehold Reform Act 1967 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Landlord and Tenant Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.234999

LT LEASEHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT – houses and flats in central London – appeals heard together regarding deferment rate – no convention that 6% established – absence of market evidence – decisions of LVTs and Lands Tribunal – settlements – financial markets – index-linked gilts – appeals allowed – deferment rates of 4.5%, 4.75% and 6.4% applied … Continue reading Arbib v Earl Cadogan: LT 15 Sep 2005

LT LEASEHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT – houses and flats in central London – appeals heard together regarding deferment rate – no convention that 6% established – absence of market evidence – decisions of LVTs and Lands Tribunal – settlements – financial markets – index-linked gilts – appeals allowed – deferment rates of 4.5%, 4.75% and 6.4% applied … Continue reading Day and Another v 32 Rosary Gardens (Freehold) Ltd: LT 15 Sep 2005

LT LEASEHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT – houses and flats in central London – appeals heard together regarding deferment rate – no convention that 6% established – absence of market evidence – decisions of LVTs and Lands Tribunal – settlements – financial markets – index-linked gilts – appeals allowed – deferment rates of 4.5%, 4.75% and 6.4% applied … Continue reading Cadogan and Another v 55/57 Cadogan Square Freehold Ltd: LT 15 Sep 2005

LT LEASEHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT – houses and flats in central London – appeals heard together regarding deferment rate – no convention that 6% established – absence of market evidence – decisions of LVTs and Lands Tribunal – settlements – financial markets – index-linked gilts – appeals allowed – deferment rates of 4.5%, 4.75% and 6.4% applied … Continue reading Cadogan and Another: LT 15 Sep 2005

LT LEASEHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT – houses and flats in central London – appeals heard together regarding deferment rate – no convention that 6% established – absence of market evidence – decisions of LVTs and Lands Tribunal – settlements – financial markets – index-linked gilts – appeals allowed – deferment rates of 4.5%, 4.75% and 6.4% applied … Continue reading Cadogan v Moussaieff: LT 15 Sep 2005

LT LEASEHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT – price payable for freehold interest – valuation methodology – tenants’ improvements – treatment of development value – comparables – Leasehold Reform Act 1967 section 9(1A)(d) – appeal allowed in part – enfranchisement price andpound;1,941,655. Citations: [2004] EWLands LRA – 21 – 2002 Links: Bailii Landlord and Tenant Updated: 30 June 2022; … Continue reading Fattal and Another v Possessions Revenues and Goods of the Free Grammar School of John Lyon: LT 14 Jan 2004

The plaintiff came to own two adjoining houses, let on long leases at low rents. She sought to use the legislation to enfranchise one property. The landlord objected saying that the houses had been used as guesthouses, and that a door had been opened up between them. They had come to be rated as one … Continue reading Wolf v Crutchley: ChD 23 Oct 1970

The claimant occupied a house under a 75 year lease. She obtained an order requiring the landlord to sell the freehold reversion to her, and then set out to sell on her interest. She contracted to sell her interest in the property and her statutory rights, and later purported to assign her rights to the … Continue reading South v Chamberlayne: ChD 7 Sep 2001

Judges: Sir Martin Nourse Lord Justice Buxton Lord Justice Sedley Citations: [2004] EWCA Civ 1530 Links: Bailii Statutes: Leasehold Reform Act 1967 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Landlord and Tenant Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.220227

The tenant served a notice under the Act, but failed to include a full list of the previous linked leases. The landlord said the notice was invalid. Held: The error was not misleading. Such notices had to be viewed in the factual background. That would inform the landlord as necessary. To defeat such a notice … Continue reading Cadogan and Another v Strauss: CA 9 Feb 2004

Work had been carried out by the leaseholders first to convert the property to multiple occupation, and subsequently back to single occupation. The tenant on exercising his right to purchase the freehold, claimed the cost shoud be reduced by the increase in value attributable to the conversion. Held: If the tenant increases the value of … Continue reading John Lyon’s Charity v Shalson: HL 12 Jun 2003

For the purposes of the Act, the original construction of a house could not to be considered as ‘any improvement’, which could be disregarded when calculating the amount payable by enfranchising tenants for the transfer of the freehold. The definition made it clear that premises could not exist apart from a house, and therefore a … Continue reading Rosen v Trustees of Camden Charities: CA 30 Nov 2000

UTLC LEASEHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT – house – price – condition – improvements – risk of tenant claiming Assured Tenancy- statutory assumptions – appeal allowed in part – Price determined at andpound;152,788 – Leasehold Reform Act 1967 section 9(1), Housing Act 1988 section 14(2)(b) and Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 Pt 1 Judges: P R Francis FRICS … Continue reading Sillvote Ltd v Liverpool City Council: UTLC 14 Jun 2010

UTLC LEASEHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT – leasehold land adjacent to, and now incorporating, part of an extension to the appellant’s freehold home – value of landlord’s reversion after 50 year extension – marriage value – Leasehold Reform Act 1967 section (9)(1) – price determined at andpound;14,000 Citations: [2009]UKUT 130 (LC) Links: Bailii Statutes: Leasehold Reform Act 1967 … Continue reading Inglands, Lower Icknield Way, Buckland, Aylesbury, Bucks, Re: UTLC 15 Jul 2009

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

It was a requirement under the 1967 Act for the notice of a lessee, seeking to extend his interest under that Act, to indicate whether he was seeking the freehold or an extended lease. The tenant failed to do so. Held: This failure was fatal. Under the statutory scheme, the notice was designed to lead … Continue reading Byrnlea Property Investments Ltd v Ramsay: CA 1969

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

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

The applicant tenant occupied property originally a pair of semi-detached derelict cottages and six acres of land. He successively reconstructed each cottage, initially living in one of them and sub-letting the other; constructed a five door garage building; and then obtained vacant possession of the sub-let cottage and opened up the dividing wall to make … Continue reading Dixon v Allgood: HL 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

CS Stephenson LJ said: ‘I would . . regard the expropriatory nature of the 1967 Act as of little weight in construing its provisions . .’ Judges: Stephenson LJ Citations: [1981] 2 All ER 40 Statutes: Leasehold Reform Act 1967 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Cadogan v McGirk CA 25-Apr-1996 The court … Continue reading Manson v Duke of Westminster: CA 1981

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

‘Materiality under the section ‘must mean material to the tenant or to his enjoyment of the house.’ Judges: Stephenson LJ Citations: [1973] 1 WLR 845 Statutes: Leasehold Reform Act 1967 2(2) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Doubted – Malekshad v Howard de Walden Estates Limited HL 5-Dec-2002 A house and an adjoining building had … Continue reading Parsons v Trustees of Henry Smith’s Charity: CA 1973

The House left open the exact meaning of the phrase ‘material’ in the section noting that whether a part is material is an issue which must be largely factual and one of common sense. The legislative purpose of the rule that divisions of the building horizontally were to be disregarded lay in the difficulty, in … Continue reading Parsons v Trustees of Henry Smith’s Charity; Parson v Gage: HL 1974

Appeal from an Order on an application for a declaration that the respondent was entitled to acquire the freehold of the house and premises known as 3 Grosvenor Gardens Mews East, London SW1 pursuant to Part 1 of the 1967 Act. Henry Carr J [2015] EWHC 3381 (Ch), [2015] WLR(D) 499 Bailii, WLRD Leasehold Reform … Continue reading West End Investments (Cowell Group) Ltd v Birchlea Ltd: ChD 27 Nov 2015

UTLC LEASEHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT – purchase price – deferment rate – flat in Shepherd’s Bush – whether the risks regarding urban cycle and obsolescence justified departure from deferment rate suggested in Earl Cadogan v Sportelli – relativity of value of 72 year lease to the value of freehold – use of graphs – appeal dismissed [2015] … Continue reading Xue v Cherry and Another: UTLC 30 Nov 2015

UTLC LEASEHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT – purchase price on enfranchisement – amendments introduced into s.9(1A) of Leasehold Reform Act 1967 by s.23(1) of Housing and Planning Act 1986 – s.23(3) providing that these amendments do not apply on a case (such as the present) where a s.14 notice of desire to have an extended lease was given … Continue reading London Sephardi Trust v John Lyon’s Charity: UTLC 19 Nov 2015

The court was asked whether a particular property fell within the definition of a ‘house’ for the purposes of the 1967 Act. Patten, Tomlinson, Vos LJJ [2015] EWCA Civ 1111 Bailii Leasehold Reform Act 1967 2(1) England and Wales Landlord and Tenant Updated: 05 January 2022; Ref: scu.554105

UTLC LEASEHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT – price – rent review clause – whether reviewed rent to be a ‘modern ground rent’ s.15(2) Leasehold Reform Act 1967 – whether rent must be a ‘marketable’ rent – presumption of reality – alternative valuations agreed – appeal dismissed [2014] UKUT 394 (LC) Bailii Leasehold Reform Act 1967 15(2) England and … Continue reading Clarise Properties Ltd v Rees and Another: UTLC 14 Oct 2014

[2008] EWCA Civ 1593 Bailii Leasehold Reform Act 1967 19 England and Wales Landlord and Tenant Updated: 23 December 2021; Ref: scu.291910

UTLC LEASEHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT – purchase price – provision in lease for rent reviews – proper construction of rent review provisions – whether LVT in error in rejecting lessor’s argument that the reviewed rent should have been assessed in the same manner as a modern ground rent under section 15(2) Leasehold Reform Act 1967 – whether … Continue reading Plotnek v Govan: UTLC 8 Sep 2014

LEASEHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT – price payable – Leasehold Reform Act 1967 section 9(1A) – assessment of an element required in the calculation of price namely the value at the valuation date of the existing lease on the statutory assumptions – relativity of that value to freehold vacant possession value – tenant relying upon evidence of a … Continue reading Kosta v Carnwath and Others: UTLC 2 Jul 2014

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 such as to invalidate the notices. Held: ‘[T]he better approach is to look at the particular statutory provisions pursuant … Continue reading Speedwell Estates Limited and Covent Garden Group Limited v Jane Rush Dalziel and others: CA 31 Jul 2001

The landlords resisted a claim for enfranchisement saying that the appellants were no longer tenants under section 42 of the 1993 Act, the lease having expired. The property was made up of five flats, and was not itself a house. Held: The tenant’s appeal was dismissed. Paragraph 5 of the schedule 12 of the 1993 … Continue reading Ackerman and Another v Lay and others (Portman Estate Nominees (One) Ltd): CA 16 Dec 2008

UTLC LEASEHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT – flats and houses in prime central London – development potential – comparables – adjustments – valuation – development hope value – development value on reversion – appeals allowed in part – s. 9(1C) Leasehold Reform Act 1967 and s. 32 and Sch. 6 Leasehold Reform Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 … Continue reading John Lyon’s Charity v Alamouti: UTLC 28 Apr 2014

Determination of the landlords reasonable costs to enfranchise the Freehold interest under section 21 (1) (ba) of the leasehold reform act 1967 [2015] UKFTT RP – BIR – 47UB – Bailii England and Wales Landlord and Tenant Updated: 19 November 2021; Ref: scu.626688

The Court considered the provisions for leasehold enfranchisement now that the residence requirement had been removed by the 2002 Act, and in particular the extent to which, at all, it had allowed enfranchisement to be available to commercial buildings. The properties raised two issues: (i) Were the buildings ‘designed or adapted for living in’? And … Continue reading Day and Another v Hosebay Ltd: SC 10 Oct 2012

Properties had been built as substantial single dwellings. Later they had been converted into separate dwellings and let accordingly. The tenants sought to acquire the freeholds under the 1967 Act. Though required by the lease to use the properties as private dwellings, they had been used as short term lets for tourists. The landlord now … Continue reading Day and Another v Hosebay Ltd; Lexgorge Ltd v Howard de Walden Estates Ltd etc: CA 1 Jul 2010

The parties disputed whether a building was a house ‘reasonably so called’ within the 1987 Act. The instant building was designed or adapted for living in, and was divided horizontally into six flats or maisonettes, and included shops. Held: The appeal failed. The words ‘reasonably so called’ are intended to be words of limitation, so … Continue reading Magnohard Ltd v Cadogan and Another: CA 4 May 2012

UTLC LEASEHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT- house – price – entirety value – investment and comparable methods – investment method acceptable subject to appropriate yield – site ratio – settlement evidence and cleared site evidence – 30% adopted – unexpired term – price determined at andpound;19,389 – section 9(1), Leasehold Reform Act 1967 – appeal allowed [2016] UKUT … Continue reading El-Gadhy and Another v Liverpool City Council: UTLC 21 Apr 2016

The tenant under a long lease sought enfranchisement. The landlord denied that it was a ‘house’ reasonably so called within the 1967 Act. The building had been constructed as a house, but was now substantially used as offices. They could only be used under the lease as to 11.5% for residential purposes, the remainder of … Continue reading Grosvenor Estates Ltd v Prospect Estates Ltd: CA 21 Nov 2008

The tenant sought to enfranchise the property under the 1967 Act. The freeholders replied that it was not a ‘house’ within the Act at the time of the notice. It had been built in the eighteenth century as a house, but the lower floors had been occupied for many years for business purposes. Recently it … Continue reading Boss Holdings Ltd v Grosvenor West End Properties and others: HL 30 Jan 2008

The Tribunal considered, for the first time the effect of a marriage value in determining the price of the freehold reversion. Held: The marriage value was to be divided equally between the freeholder and tenant applicant. W H Rees FRICS [1976] 1 EGLR 215, [1976] 238 EG 421, (1976) 32 P and CR 147 Housing … Continue reading Norfolk v Trinity College, Cambridge: 1 Apr 1976

The tenant owned two leasehold properties, which had been joined into one. The tenant sought enfranchisement of only one of the properties to avoid being blocked by the rateable value limit, and by 2(2). . .

LT LEASEHOLD ENFRANSHISEMENT – extended lease – ground rent – lack of market evidence – standing house approach – personal or financial circumstances not to be taken into account – legislation to be applied as it . .

The tenant gave notice to enfranchise his leasehold property. The landlord resisted saying it had been given after the tenancy had expired and also that it purported to include property not capable of enfranchisement.
Held: A notice which . .