header-logo header-logo

06 November 2008
Issue: 7344 / Categories: Legal News , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Commercial landlords benefit from Raguz ruling

House of Lords restores common sense to commercial property market

The House of Lords has overturned a controversial decision which extended commercial property landlords’ duties to issue warning notices to ex-tenants, should they wish to exercise their right to claim arrears.

Scottish & Newcastle Plc v Raguz, upheld an appeal against an earlier decision that many in the property industry had criticised as unworkable.

In March 2007, the Court of Appeal interpreted the meaning of the word “due” in Landlord and Tenant (Covenants) Act 1995, s 17 in a way that the property industry regarded as too restrictive. It meant landlords would forfeit their right to recover arrears of current tenants from former tenants, unless they had issued a warning notice to ex-tenants whenever a rent review was delayed—even if current payments were up to date. The warning notice would have to specify the claim as “nothing yet but wait and see”, the court said.

According to David Sanders, a real estate partner at City law firm Macfarlanes LLP, this would have resulted in landlords having to send out default notices for unpaid rent, even if there had been no default.

However, last week’s House of Lords ruling means landlords now no longer need to serve a default notice unless the new rent has been fixed and the tenant has not yet paid it. Sanders says: “Lord Scott today described the earlier Court of Appeal ruling as ‘ridiculous’, and Lord Hoff mann said it had ‘remarkably silly consequences’. The property industry has been saying exactly the same thing for the last eighteen months.

If the earlier decision had been upheld, this would have placed an absurd burden on landlords, while at the same time causing unnecessary alarm to ex-tenants...Common sense has been restored.”

Issue: 7344 / Categories: Legal News , Commercial
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Weightmans—Elborne Mitchell & Myton Law

Weightmans—Elborne Mitchell & Myton Law

Firm expands in London and Leeds with dual merger

Boodle Hatfield—Clare Pooley & Michael Duffy

Boodle Hatfield—Clare Pooley & Michael Duffy

Private wealth and real estate firmpromotes two to partner and five to senior associate

Constantine Law—James Baker & Julie Goodway

Constantine Law—James Baker & Julie Goodway

Agile firm expands employment team with two partner hires

NEWS

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
back-to-top-scroll