header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
05 August 2020 / Nick Hopkins , Rebecca Sage
Issue: 7898 / Categories: Features , Profession , Property
printer mail-detail

Leasehold reform: a long time coming (Pt 2)

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
25499
The Law Commission’s reforms represent a better deal for leaseholders, say Nick Hopkins & Rebecca Sage

In brief

  • Reforms to improve the rights available to existing leaseholders.
  • Leasehold ownership.

On 21 July 2020, the Law Commission published three reports on leasehold and commonhold reform (https://bit.ly/3katg5p). In our first article we focused on commonhold reform and the future of ownership in which residential leasehold is no longer needed (‘Leasehold reform: a long time coming’, NLJ 31 July 2020, p8). While there can be an ambition for freehold to be the basis of ownership for most flats as well as houses going forward, it is essential that the law is reformed to help those who remain or become leaseholders.

Our reports contain recommendations to improve the process by which leaseholders can buy the freehold or extend their lease (enfranchisement) or take over the management of their building by exercising the right to manage (RTM). In line with the aim of the projects agreed

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Policing the safeguards when appointing trust corporations
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
NLJ this week: What the court considers when assessing refusal of ADR
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
NLJ this week: Finding innovative ways to fund the justice gap
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: Two’s company, but three’s a crowd in financial provision cases
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
Charities Appeals Supplement: March 2026
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll