Archive
No further forward
One of the most vexing questions in service charge litigation is the interaction between default judgment and s.81, Housing Act 1996. In summary, s.81, 1996 Act requires that, before any notice under s.146, Law of Property Act 1925 (forfeiture) can be served, or any right of re-entry exercised, there must be a “final determination” that the amount of the service charge is due. This can be provided by the LVT, arbitral tribunal or court. Alternatively, the tenant can admit the sum is due.
Now, is a default judgment a “final determination” for these purposes? This is quite important because, in the overwhelming majority of service charge arrears cases, the landlord… Read the full post
Comments Off
Calling Hercules J
Freeholders of 69 Marina, St Leonards-on-Sea v Oram and another [2011] EWCA Civ 1258
A case on costs of LVT and county court proceedings, and quite an important one at that. 69 Marina is a building in St Leonards-on-Sea. It has been converted into 6 flats, five of which were let on long leaseholders. Four of the leaseholders were registered as freeholders and held the freehold on trust for all the leaseholders. In 2005, works totalling £19,031.36 were done to the property to remedy some water penetration. The freeholder sought to recover the costs via the service charge, but the two leaseholder defendants did not make the payments sought. The… Read the full post
Comments Off
Case Comment: Berrisford v Mexfield Housing Co-operative Ltd [2011] UKSC 52
In this test case – the parties having settled the substantive possession claim prior to the Court of Appeal hearing ([2010] EWCA Civ 811) – the issue for their Lordships was whether Mexfield Housing Co-operative Ltd had granted Ms Berrisford a leg…
Comments Off
Is it reasonable to expect tenants to pay large service charges?
The Upper Chamber Lands Tribunal recently considered whether in determining if costs have been reasonably incurred account should be taken of the financial impact on tenants and whether major works should be phased (Garside and others v. RYFC Ltd and o…
Comments Off
No facts please, we’re reviewing
Bubb v London Borough of Wandsworth [2011] EWCA Civ 1285
In an appeal under s.204 Housing Act 1996, should the County Court determine disputed factual issues? In this second appeal, the Court of Appeal effectively holds not.
Ms Bubb was in temporary accommodation after Wandsworth accepted the full s.193 housing duty. She was accommodated at a property called Trayfoot Lodge but after a year, in March 2009, she was moved to a property called Clarkson House. In August 2009 Wandsworth decided to offer permanent accommodation in a property called Alfreda Court. Wandsworth’s case was that a letter was sent, by hand, to Ms B at Clarkson House on 11 August,… Read the full post
Comments Off
Happily ever after………
As shown in the previous blog, many issues can arise when couples purchase a property together. With this in mind,…
Comments Off
Until the Abbott be deposed: uncertain terms
Berrisford v Mexfield Housing Co-operative Ltd (Rev 1) [2011] UKSC 32
What happens to a lease for an uncertain term? Or a tenancy that ends on some specified event, whose date is not known and which may or may not happen? Can either the tenant or the landlord rely on the clauses in the tenancy agreement?
The Supreme Court simply and indeed elegantly gives us the answer in this case, the final part of the extraordinary saga of Ms Berrisford and the Mexfield housing Co-op, which saw Mexfield arguing in the Court of Appeal that all of the tenancies it had granted were invalid. (Our reports on the High… Read the full post
Comments Off
Jones v Kernott: Ending the big debate?
One of the things I really don’t like about academics is the way they sit in their offices with their heads so full of doctrinal legal theory that they forget (if they ever knew) about the ways real people lead their lives. What got me through land law as a student was Gray and Symes’ textbook, Real Property and Real People. The great thing about the re-invention of the constructive trust in the 1960s was that it seemed to provide a sufficiently malleable tool to connect real property and real people. So what if it was improper or that, properly, the approach should be the strict presumed resulting trust –… Read the full post
Comments Off
Case Comment: Re Kaupthing Singer & Friedlander Ltd and Re the Insolvency Act 1986 [2011] UKSC 48
In its recent decision in Re Kaupthing Singer & Friedlander Ltd and Re the Insolvency Act 1986 [2011] UKSC 48, the Supreme Court unanimously overturned the High Court’s decision in Mill & Ors v HSBC Trustee (C.I.) Ltd & Ors [2009] EW…
Comments Off
Case Comment: Rainy Sky S.A. & Ors v Kookmin Bank [2011] UKSC 50
By Oliver Gayner and Cathryn Hopkins, Olswang
In Rainy Sky v Kookmin Bank, in which judgment was handed down on Wednesday, the…
Comments Off