Law of Property Act 1925

A notice under the Law of Property Act 1925 s.146 could only be validly served if a right of re-entry to leasehold premises had arisen through a particular breach under the provisions of the lease having occurred. There was no authority for the proposition that a s.146 notice could be served before the relevant right to re-entry had occurred, on the basis of an anticipated breach.

For more information see the England and Wales High Court (Queen’s Bench Division) Decisions.

Cutting Walls Without Landlord’s Consent

23rd February case – Raja v Aviram [2016] UKUT 102 (LC) – this case concerned a covenant against cutting a wall without landlord’s consent. However, holes were cut by a contractor to enable a new boiler to be installed. The Tribunal looked at the relevance of the tenant’s knowledge and the relevance of the landlord’s failure to provide a contact address and section 168(4), Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002.

The Indemnity Principle

11 February 2016 – Triplerose Ltd Re Forth Banks Tower [2016] UKUT 77 (LC) – very interesting appeal case about the application of the principle of law known as the indemnity principle to the entitlement of a landlord to be paid costs incurred in consequence of a claim to exercise the right to manage under Part 2 of the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002.

The Gulf Between Landlord and Tenant

The Gulf Agencies Ltd v Ahmed [2016] EWCA Civ 44 (03 February 2016) – this case related to the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 – the tenant brought proceedings for the grant of a new tenancy. The landlord resisted the application on the ground set out in section 30(1)(g), that he intended to occupy the premises for the purposes of a business to be carried on by him at the premises and whether the landlord had established his entitlement to rely on section 30(1)(g).