- A house ‘reasonably so called’—last user not the only consideration (Grosvenor v Merix)
- Original news
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What is the law in this area?
- What was the issue involved?
- What were the arguments involved?
- What did the Court of Appeal decide?
- What could be taken from the authorities?
- Hosebay/Lexgorge joined appeals (together Hosebay)
- What did the Court of Appeal decide regarding the ‘turning back the clock’ argument?
- So what approach should the court take?
- Analogy to Boss
- Case details
Property analysis: The Court of Appeal confirmed that in deciding whether a building was a ‘house’ for the purposes of enfranchisement under the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 (LRA 1967), the last user—thirteen years previously—was not the only consideration. Buildings are infinitely variable in character and function, affected in part by historic user.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial