Q&As

A protective application was made to the Property Tribunal on the basis that it was almost six months since service of the counter notice and terms had not been agreed. Terms have now been agreed. Should the Tribunal be asked to stay proceedings or should they be withdrawn following the agreement of terms?

read titleRead full title
Produced in partnership with Shabnam Ali-Khan of Russell-Cooke
Published on LexisPSL on 12/10/2020

The following Property Disputes Q&A produced in partnership with Shabnam Ali-Khan of Russell-Cooke provides comprehensive and up to date legal information covering:

  • A protective application was made to the Property Tribunal on the basis that it was almost six months since service of the counter notice and terms had not been agreed. Terms have now been agreed. Should the Tribunal be asked to stay proceedings or should they be withdrawn following the agreement of terms?

We have assumed that this query relates to an application to the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) for collective enfranchisement or lease extension under the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993.

When a counter notice is served pursuant to section 21 (for collective enfranchisement) or section 45 (for lease extension) of the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993, both parties have a period of six months from the service of the counter notice to reach agreement on the terms of acquisition. Where the matter concerns a lease extension the terms are essentially the terms of the lease and the premiu

Related documents:

Popular documents