header-logo header-logo

Money back guarantee? (Pt 1)

14 October 2016 / Joseph Ollech , Philip Sissons
Issue: 7718 / Categories: Features , Property
printer mail-detail
nlj_7718_sissons

In a special two-part series, Philip Sissons & Joseph Ollech study costs recovery in long residential lease disputes

  • The scope of the FTT’s jurisdiction to award costs under the 2013 rules which govern its procedure.
  • An important recent decision of the Upper Tribunal clarifying the scope of that jursidiction.
  • Alternative, contractual, routes to cost recovery where recent case-law has clarified the extent to which a landlord might be able to recoup legal costs either directly from the tenant involved in the dispute or via the service charge.

Long residential leases are a fertile source of litigation. Aside from enfranchisement, disputes frequently arise regarding service charges and other breaches of lease covenants and a very large proportion of these disputes are litigated wholly in the First-Tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) (FTT).

These cases often involve relatively small sums of money or relatively trivial breaches of covenant. However (not least because of the complexity of the statutory regulation of service charges) the legal costs incurred in the proceedings are frequently significant and often disproportionate

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll