header-logo header-logo

Potential issues for leaseholders under the Building Safety Act 2022

17 November 2023 / Nicola Brant
Issue: 8049 / Categories: Features , Property , Leasehold
printer mail-detail
146635
Nicola Brant finds troublesome defects in the Act which was meant to improve building safety after Grenfell
  • Highlights uncertainties under the Building Safety Act 2022, which require urgent clarification.

In the words of the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC), ‘[t]his Act makes ground-breaking reforms to give residents and homeowners more rights, powers, and protections—so homes across the country are safer. It delivers far-reaching protections for qualifying leaseholders from the costs associated with remediating historical building safety defects, and an ambitious toolkit of measures that will allow those responsible for building safety defects to be held to account’. This admirable aim fulfilled a promise made after the tragic fire at Grenfell Tower in 2017, which cost the lives of 72 people.

The Building Safety Act 2022 (BSA 2022) came into effect last summer, and has already required some changes to deal with issues for the construction sector, but only now are some of the issues for leaseholders coming to light. This article looks

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

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
Michael Zander KC, emeritus professor at LSE, revisits his long-forgotten Crown Court Study (1993), which surveyed 22,000 participants across 3,000 cases, in the first of a two-part series for NLJ
Getty Images v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch) was a landmark test of how UK law applies to AI training—but does it leave key questions unanswered, asks Emma Kennaugh-Gallagher of Mewburn Ellis in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll