Consensus Business Group (Ground Rents) Ltd v Palgrave Gardens Freehold Company Ltd [2020] EWHC 920 (Ch) (23 April 2020)

Consensus Business Group (Ground Rents) Ltd v Palgrave Gardens Freehold Company Ltd [2020] EWHC 920 (Ch) (23 April 2020)

The notice was formally valid under s 13(3)(a) as it sufficiently specified the premises and property to be acquired, the court had jurisdiction under paragraph 15(2) Schedule 3 to permit amendment to include the car park, and the premises specified in the re-amended notice constituted a single self-contained building for the purposes of the 1993 Act.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 920 (Ch)
Parties
Appellant/defendant: Consensus Business Group (Ground Rents) Ltd; Respondent/claimant: Palgrave Gardens Freehold Company Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 April 2020
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From County Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Collective Enfranchisement, Leasehold Reform, Notice Validity, Statutory Interpretation
Property Law Landlord and Tenant Law Collective Enfranchisement Leasehold Reform Notice Validity Statutory Interpretation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Consensus Business Group (Ground Rents) Ltd

Appellant/defendant

Palgrave Gardens Freehold Company Ltd

Respondent/claimant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From County Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the initial notice under s 13(3)(a) of the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 was formally valid
  2. 2 Whether the court had jurisdiction to permit amendment of the notice under paragraph 15(2) of Schedule 3
  3. 3 Whether the premises specified in the re-amended notice constituted a self-contained building for the purposes of s 3

Ratio Decidendi

The notice was formally valid under s 13(3)(a) as it sufficiently specified the premises and property to be acquired, the court had jurisdiction under paragraph 15(2) Schedule 3 to permit amendment to include the car park, and the premises specified in the re-amended notice constituted a single self-contained building for the purposes of the 1993 Act.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Declaration granted that tenants named in the re-amended notice are entitled to exercise the right to collective enfranchisement
  • Permission to amend the notice in accordance with the re-amended notice