Rely on the most comprehensive, up-to-date legal content designed and curated by lawyers for lawyers
Work faster and smarter to improve your drafting productivity without increasing risk
Accelerate the creation and use of high quality and trusted legal documents and forms
Streamline how you manage your legal business with proven tools and processes
Manage risk and compliance in your organisation to reduce your risk profile
Stay up to date and informed with insights from our trusted experts, news and information sources
Access the best content in the industry, effortlessly — confident that your news is trustworthy and up to date.
With over 30 practice areas, we have all bases covered. Find out how we can help
Our trusted tax intelligence solutions, highly-regarded exam training and education materials help guide and tutor Tax professionals
Regulatory, business information and analytics solutions that help professionals make better decisions
A leading provider of software platforms for professional services firms
In-depth analysis, commentary and practical information to help you protect your business
LexisNexis Blogs shed light on topics affecting the legal profession and the issues you're facing
Legal professionals trust us to help navigate change. Find out how we help ensure they exceed expectations
Lex Chat is a LexisNexis current affairs podcast sharing insights on topics for the legal profession
Discuss the latest legal developments, ask questions, and share best practice with other LexisPSL subscribers
In Wiggins v Regent Wealth  EWCA Civ 1078 the Court of Appeal decided that an initial notice could not be amended to include leases granted after it was served.
The leasehold structure of the property was fairly complex, with a headlease, a management lease, occupational underleases of the seven flats, overriding leases of those flats and an ‘enforcer lease’ above the management lease to allow enforcement of it despite the grant of the overriding leases. The initial notice specified all these leasehold interests as interests to be acquired, other than the occupational underleases.
The freeholder served a counter-notice admitting the participating tenants were entitled to exercise the right of collective enfranchisement.
The initial notice was not registered against the titles of the landlords of the overriding leases of the third, fourth and fifth floors (the old leases). Subsequently, the landlords of each of the old leases granted further long underleases (the new leases) which were registered at the Land Registry.
The solicitors for the landlords of the old leases claimed that the new leases were not liable to acquisition, and that, if the enfranchisement went ahead, the participating tenants would acquire the old leases subject to the new leases, but for a price which disregarded the existence of the new leases. They argued the participating tenants should pay nearly £7m for the old leases which now only gave the right to possession for 10 days in 2122.
The participating tenants asked the landlords to agree an amendment to the initial notice to include the new leases. They refused.
Subsequently the participating tenants acquired the freehold, headlease and the enforcer lease.
In the county court it was held that:
The immediate landlords of appealed this decision and the Court of Appeal allowed the appeal.
Section 1 of the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 (LRHUDA 1993) provides that subject to various qualifying criteria, ten
Access this article and thousands of others like it free by subscribing to our blog.
Read full article
Already a subscriber? Login
0330 161 1234