header-logo header-logo

05 May 2017 / Winston Jacob
Issue: 7744 / Categories: Features , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Error message

nlj_7744_jacob

Tenants seeking to exercise the right to manage will welcome the Court of Appeal’s recent decision on procedural non-compliance, says Winston Jacob

  • The primary objective of the right to manage legislation is to enable an RTM company, simply and cheaply, to acquire the right to manage, and to avoid both duplication of effort and administrative untidiness once it has been acquired.
  • Where an RTM company has failed to comply with the statutory notice requirements, the court’s focus must be on whether Parliament intended that a landlord (or other person entitled to serve a counter-notice) could successfully contend that the defect in the relevant notice was fatal to its validity.
  • A failure by an RTM company to comply precisely with the requirements for a notice of intention to participate does not automatically invalidate all subsequent steps.

Many statutes lay down a procedure for the exercise or acquisition by a person or body of some right conferred by the statute without specifying the consequences of a failure to comply with the procedure. In such cases,

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
Digital loot may feel like property, but civil law is not always convinced. In NLJ this week, Paul Schwartfeger of 36 Stone and Nadia Latti of CMS examine fraud involving platform-controlled digital assets, from ‘account takeover and asset stripping’ to ‘value laundering’
Lasting powers of attorney (LPAs) are not ‘set and forget’ documents. In this week's NLJ, Ann Stanyer of Wedlake Bell urges practitioners to review LPAs every five years and after major life changes
back-to-top-scroll