The London Borough of Camden (“Camden”) embarked on a major works project to inter alia, properties on Grafton Way. he works were such as to require Camden to consult the leaseholders in accordance with the provisions of s.20 Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (as amended). Camden failed to comply with the consultation requirements.

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.”

The appellants were the freehold owners of a property, which was then let to tenants on a long lease. The lease contained a clause requiring the tenant: “within 28 days of any assignment, charge, underlease or sub-underlease...to pay the Landlord’s solicitor’s charges of £25.00 together with value added tax thereon for the registration of every such document.”

The appellant leaseholders had challenged a number of items of service charge expenditure incurred by the respondent managing agents. In the course of the proceedings, the LVT had given a number of directions...

The applicants were leaseholders who had purchased their leases under the Right to Buy scheme. They sought, amongst other issues, a determination under s.27A Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 of their service charge liabilities from the years 1989/90. The landlord submitted that there was a 6 year limitation period, while the leaseholders submitted that it was twelve years.

The applicant had covenanted to pay a maintenance charge of £100 or (if higher) 1/10 of the costs of inter alia, lighting, heating, cleaning, repairing, decorating, maintaining, renewing the common parts. However, the obligation was dependent on the landlord’s surveyor issuing a certificate.