header-logo header-logo

24 September 2025
Issue: 8132 / Categories: Legal News , Landlord&tenant , Housing , Construction , Health & safety
printer mail-detail

Clarification on cladding costs

Leaseholders are not liable to pay for the cost of remediating dangerous cladding, the Upper Tribunal has held

Almacantar Centre Point Nominee No1 Ltd & Ors v De Valk & Ors [2025] UKUT 298 (LC) concerned the iconic Centre Point House in London’s Tottenham Court Road. The landlord contended remediating the type of dangerous cladding involved was recoverable as a service charge. The leaseholders argued the reverse.

Bhavini Patel, senior associate at Howard Kennedy, acting for ten leaseholders, said: ‘The case is important as it looks at key concepts of what was meant by “cladding”, “cladding remediation” and “unsafe”. It cannot be clearer… that the courts and tribunals will do their utmost to uphold Parliament’s intentions and to protect leaseholders from costs of remediation and work which they had no part of.’

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Slater Heelis—Charlotte Beck

Slater Heelis—Charlotte Beck

Partner and Manchester office lead appointed head of family

Civil Justice Council—Nigel Teasdale

Civil Justice Council—Nigel Teasdale

DWF insurance services director appointed to Civil Justice Council

R3—Jodie Wildridge

R3—Jodie Wildridge

Kings Chambers barrister appointed chair of R3 Yorkshire

NEWS

The abolition of assured shorthold tenancies and section 21 evictions marks the beginning of a ‘brave new world’ for England’s rental sector, writes Daniel Bacon of Seddons GSC

Stephen Gold’s latest Civil Way column rounds up a flurry of procedural and regulatory changes reshaping housing, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and personal injury litigation
Patients are being systematically failed by an NHS complaints regime that is opaque, poorly enforced and often stacked against them, argues Charles Davey of The Barrister Group
A wealthy Russian divorce battle has produced a sharp warning about trying to challenge foreign nuptial agreements in the wrong English court. Writing in NLJ this week, Vanessa Friend and Robert Jackson of Hodge Jones & Allen examine Timokhin v Timokhina, where the High Court enforced Russian judgments arising from a prenuptial agreement despite arguments based on the landmark Radmacher decision
An obscure Victorian tort may be heading for an unexpected revival after a significant Privy Council ruling that could reshape liability for dangerous escapes, according to Richard Buckley, barrister and emeritus professor of law at the University of Reading
back-to-top-scroll