LvT Case Law
We provide summaries and analysis of important landmark legal decisions from the LVT, First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) and Higher Courts affecting the residential leasehold property sector. It is a valuable resource for anyone involved in this industry.
Search Case Law Listings
Most Recent Cases
Curzon v Wolstenholme & Others
A collective enfranchisement initial notice that is served in accordance with Chapter 1 of Part I of the Leasehold Reform, Housing & Urban Development Act 1993 (“the 1993 Act”) remains in force and is therefore binding on the recipient reversioner unless and until the occurrence of one of the three events prescribed by section 13(11) of the 1993 Act.
Ninety Broomfield Road RTM Co. Ltd and others v Triplerose Ltd
Right to Manage
The Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 creates a right for the appropriate proportion of qualifying leaseholders of flats in a self-contained building or part of a building to establish a “right to manage”. This case establishes that a Right to Manage Company set up for this purpose can only acquire the right to manage a single building or part of a building.
Norwich City Council v Simon & Susanne Redford
The council was not entitled to recover a proportion of lightning maintenance costs incurred under a city-wide contract where the costs varied depending upon the number of call-outs and there was no evidence as to what extent, if at all, the costs related to the estate on which the subject property was located.
Sennadine Properties Limited v Heelis
Appointment of a Manager
The LVT (as it then was) had exceeded its jurisdiction by making a management order allowing the manager to re-let a commercial unit and to collect rent in respect of the same. It would have been preferable for the manager to approach the landlord for a contribution towards the costs of the provision of services in the first instance. The terms of management orders should be proportionate to the tasks which the tenants are entitled under their leases to ask the landlord to perform.
Natt v Osman
Enfranchisement, Right to Manage
The personal circumstances, knowledge and prejudice caused to a freeholder served with a defective s.13 notice were of no significance when assessing whether or not the notice was valid. The approach of the court is no longer to look to whether the requirements of the statute were mandatory or directory but to assess the purpose and importance of the statutory requirement in the context of the statutory scheme as a whole.
Merie Bin Mahfouz Company (UK) Limited v Barrie House (Freehold) Limited
In a collective enfranchisement claim, in order for a leaseback claim to be successful under s.36 of and paragraph 5 of Schedule 9 to the 1993 Act, the relevant units must have existed as units in which a leasehold interest could properly be created when the initial notice is served by the nominee purchaser.