Citation
Waterson, G. and Lee, R. (2001), "Leasehold enfranchisement", Property Management, Vol. 19 No. 4. https://doi.org/10.1108/pm.2001.11319dab.008
Publisher
:Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Copyright © 2001, MCB UP Limited
Leasehold enfranchisement
Leasehold enfranchisement
Burman v. Mount Cook Land Ltd [2001] 10 EG 164
In this case, the long leaseholder had served a notice on the landlord under s.42 of the leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993, claiming a new lease of the premises and offering to pay a premium of £l10,000. The landlord responded by serving what purported to be a counter-notice under s.45 of the Act, proposing a premium of £175,000. However, the counter-notice did not, as required by the provisions of s. 45, expressly admit that the landlord accepted the right of the leaseholder to claim a new lease under the Act. The question which arose, therefore, was whether the counter-notice was a valid counter-notice for the purposes of the 1993 Act. Yes, said the court. It is true that it did not expressly admit the leaseholder's right to a new lease, but neither did it deny that the leaseholder had such a right. Moreover, if the landlord had been contesting the claim he would have had to have spelt out the reasons therefore. It was clear that the only thing that the landlord was disputing was the amount of the proposed premium, and a reasonable tenant on receiving the landlord's counter-notice would reasonably conclude that in other respects the claim was admitted. Since the counter-notice, though not quite in the proper form, had not been misleading, it was valid counter-notice for the purposes of the 1993 Act.
As to the calculation of the price of a block of four purpose-built maisonettes by three of the tenants under the 1993 Act, see In Shulem B Association Ltd's Appeal [2001] 11 EG 175.
Readers may also wish to note that Rosen v. Trustees of the Camden Charities, The Times' Law Report of which was summarised in Property Management, 19(2) at p. 179, has now been reported more fully in the Estates Gazette, 10 March 2000 at [2001] 10 EG 159.