The appellants/tenants were the leasehold owners of a building and the respondents were the freehold owners of the same. The building had been subdivided into five flats, one of which was occupied by the appellants.
Enfranchisement Earl Cadogan v Erkman concerns attempts to get around the decision of the Court of Appeal in the Sportelli litigation.
The Court of Appeal decision confirmed that, at least as regards Prime Central London, there was a general deferment rate of 4.75% for houses and 5% for flats and that the Lands Tribunal could and should give detailed guidance of this sort for the benefit of the LVT. This aspect of the decision was not appealed to the House of Lords.
Enfranchisement is the process whereby leaseholders can force their freeholder to sell them the freehold of the property. The Leasehold Reform Act 1967 provided for the enfranchisement of leasehold houses whilst those who live in flats can utilise the collective enfranchisement procedure in the Leasehold Reform Housing and Urban Development Act 1993. Alternatively, a leaseholder can seek to force the freeholder to grant an extension to his existing lease, again under the 1993 Act.
Robert Long, President of the Southern Panel of the Residential Property Tribunal, provides an insight into the Leasehold Valuation Tribunal’s (LVT) operations in the south of England.
Both appellants had sought to exercise the right to an individual lease extension, as contained in Part 1, Chapter 2, Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993. The freeholder in each case disputed that the head lessee was a “qualifying tenant.”
