© 2025 News On The Block. All rights reserved.
News on the Block is a trading name of Premier Property Media Ltd.
© 2025 News On The Block. All rights reserved.
News on the Block is a trading name of Premier Property Media Ltd.
The case of Brightbest Ltd v Meyrick arose after the claimant leaseholder investigated whether they were permitted to purchase the freehold to the two properties, which comprised one main building and a cottage. However, this raised questions as to whether the properties could be classed as a house, given that they had been converted into flats and bedsits and used as a hostel.
Mark Vinall, a partner at Winckworth Sherwood Solicitors, commented: “The court applied the principles from the Supreme Court’s decision in Day v Hosebay , to decide whether two derelict buildings were ‘houses’ within the meaning of the Leasehold Reform Act 1967, namely whether the building was one ‘designed or adapted for living in’ or was a ‘house ... reasonably so called’.
"The court looked at the story told by the documents as opposed to relying on the way in which the parties described the properties. It concluded that while It was clear that the main building was initially designed to be lived in extensive alterations had been undertaken changing the property into a ‘hostel’ and a ‘home for ladies of limited means’, the property had completely changed in character.
“A new lease had to be granted because the contemplated change in use was so significant. By 1930 the property was not a house, reasonably so called; there were no contemporaneous documents to suggest that it was regarded as anything other than a hostel.”