Home Page > Monthly Update > Long leases.

Home Page
Contact
Editorial Team

Boundaries and adverse possession.
Business lease renewal.
Co-ownership and estoppel.
Easements.
Landlord and tenant (general).
Long leases.
Mobile homes.
Mortgages.
Nuisance and trespass.
Planning.
Property litigation and ADR.
Property transactions.
Public access to land.
Residential tenancies.
Restrictive covenants.

Current page






Long leases.

The editors of this section are Piers Harrison, barrister (enfranchisement) and Jonathan Upton, barrister (service charges), assisted by Harriet Holmes, Richard Alford, Katie Gray, Diane Doliveux, Caoimhe McKearney, Will Beetson and Sam Madge-Wyld all of Tanfield Chambers London.


There are five cases this month:
  • A collective enfranchisement initial notice ceases to have effect where it is not registered and the freehold is transferred to a third party and then re-transferred.
  • Guidance was given on the proper construction in a rent review clause on the meaning of "open market letting value"
  • A copy of a claim notice for the right to manage could be served validly by email on the qualifying tenants
  • An interim demand for a service charge must be made no later than 18 months after the charges were incurred
  • The service charge provisions of an underlease did not require the underlessee to pay for the maintenance of certain areas.

Collective enfranchisement

Transfer of reversion

Curzon v Wolstenholme
[2017] EWCA Civ 1098

Summary

A collective enfranchisement initial notice ceases to have effect where it is not registered and the freehold is transferred to a third party and then subsequently re-transferred. The Court also held that where the parties had agreed some, but not all, of the terms of the transfer, the First-tier Tribunal has no jurisdiction to interfere with those terms without a change of circumstances.

Facts

In 2004 the participating tenants served a collective enfranchisement initial notice under the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993. In 2007, the parties’ respective surveyors agreed the purchase price and certain other terms, though not the entirety of the terms of acquisition. The agreement was recorded in a document that was signed by both surveyors and stated that, in the event of the parties not agreeing the remaining terms of acquisition, being the detailed terms of the proposed lease-back of the first floor flat and garden, either party reserved the right to apply to the LVT (as it then was) for their determination, but that the agreed terms were to remain as ... THIS IS AN EXTRACT OF THE FULL TEXT. TO GET THE FULL TEXT, SEE BELOW

Existing members, to login click => here
If you have found this page useful, you may be interested in the following:

Options
Free Summaries £nil
Full Membership From £207 + VAT (1 year)