Daejan Properties Ltd v Bellringer Investments Ltd [2002] EWCA Civ 663 (1 May 2002)

Daejan Properties Ltd v Bellringer Investments Ltd [2002] EWCA Civ 663 (1 May 2002)

A section 42 notice is invalid if the proposed premium is not a realistic offer for the grant of a new lease, as established in Cadogan v Morris. The judge's finding that the offer was wholly unrealistic justified invalidating the notice.

Citation
[2002] EWCA Civ 663
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Daejan Properties Limited; Defendant/applicant: Bellringer Investments Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 May 2002
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Leasehold Reform, Validity of Section 42 Notice, Premium Proposal Requirements
Property Law Landlord and Tenant Leasehold Reform Validity of Section 42 Notice Premium Proposal Requirements

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Daejan Properties Limited

Claimant/respondent

Bellringer Investments Limited

Defendant/applicant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a notice under section 42 of the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 is invalid if the proposed premium is unrealistic
  2. 2 Whether the requirement for a 'realistic' premium is supported by precedent

Ratio Decidendi

A section 42 notice is invalid if the proposed premium is not a realistic offer for the grant of a new lease, as established in Cadogan v Morris. The judge's finding that the offer was wholly unrealistic justified invalidating the notice.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Permission to appeal refused
  • Permission to rely on further evidence refused