This Practice Note summarises the service charge exemptions, whereby no or limited service charges are payable, in respect of remediation of ‘relevant defects’ applicable to certain leaseholders in various circumstances under Schedule 8 of the Building Safety Act 2022 (BSA 2022). Other than in respect of one exception, the service charge protections under Schedule 8 only apply to ‘qualifying leases’ of premises. For further guidance regarding the definition of ‘qualifying lease’ and the other defined terms used in Schedule 8, including ‘relevant building’, ‘relevant measure’, and ‘relevant defect’, see Practice Note: Building Safety Act 2022—landlord and tenant issues — Remediation of historic defects—definitions and Q&A: How do the conditions relating to a ‘qualifying lease’ under section 119(2)(d) of the Building Safety Act 2022 operate? Circumstance and amount of service charge payable Type of lease Reference Further detail No service charge payable in respect of a relevant measure relating to any relevant defect where a relevant landlord was responsible for the relevant defect or was associated

This Practice Note gives brief details of the main remedies available to tenants to deal with a breach of covenant by the landlord, or interference with the tenant’s rights. These include remedies to deal with a specific breach, such as an injunction or damages, and remedies to take control of the property more generally, such as appointing a manager. Disputes may arise out of covenants to provide services or to insure (and to use insurance money to reinstate), or from interference with a tenant’s rights, such as rights of access. For more specific guidance: • on disrepair, see Practice Note: Dilapidations during the term—claims by the tenant • on the covenant for quiet enjoyment, see Practice Note: Derogation from grant and the covenant for quiet enjoyment • on landlord insolvency, see Practice Note: Quick guide to property insolvency—Insolvency of a landlord • on withholding of consent to assign or underlet, see Practice Note: Tenant’s remedies for unreasonable withholding of consent—assignment and underletting Injunction or specific performance An injunction will

The Housing Act 1988 (HA 1988) governs the methods of determining both assured tenancies and assured shorthold tenancies. This Practice Note provides a summary of the different methods including service of section 8 and section 21 notices and explains the options for possession proceedings. There are two regimes: • for private sector landlords beginning the termination process after 1 May 2026 (where the amendments introduced by the Renters’ Rights Act 2025 (RRA 2025) apply)—see Practice Note: Private sector assured tenancies—terminating, and • in other cases—see Practice Note: Terminating assured and assured shorthold tenancies—pre-Renters' Rights Act position Definitions Assured tenancy (AT)—the main form of private residential security of tenure, which can only be unilaterally terminated by the landlord using the procedure under HA 1988, s 8 based on a ground contained in HA 1988, Sch 2. Assured shorthold tenancy (AST)—a type of AT with reduced security of tenure. All private sector ASTs are converted to ATs from 1 May 2026 (subject to transitional provisions where a notice seeking

FORTHCOMING CHANGES: there are a number of proposed changes to the leasehold and enfranchisement landscape—for more information, see Practice Note: Property—horizon scanner. This Practice Note summarises the key time limits involved in exercising the statutory right (subject to statutory qualifying criteria) of qualifying tenants of long leases of flats to collectively acquire the freehold of the relevant premises containing the flats (collectively enfranchise) under the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 (LRHUDA 1993), and the consequences of failing to meet those time limits, including the time limits for service of a section 21 counter-notice, for service of the draft lease and responses, for applications to the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) (or Leasehold Valuation Tribunal (LVT) in Wales) and/or to the County Court. For more detailed guidance in respect of the LRHUDA 1993 collective enfranchisement procedure, see Practice Note: Guide to the right to collective enfranchisement under the Leasehold, Reform Housing and Urban Development Act 1993.

This Practice Note summarises the key time limits involved in exercising the statutory right (subject to statutory qualifying criteria) of qualifying tenants of long leases of houses to acquire the freehold (individual enfranchisement), or to buy a 50-year extension of the lease of the house under the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 (LRA 1967), and any consequences of failing to meet those time limits. Action Time Limit Sanction/Consequence LRA 1967 or related legislative provision Landlord’s notice in reply to claim (acquisition of the freehold or a lease extension) Within two months after the date of service of the tenant’s notice of claim If the landlord wishes to object to the inclusion or exclusion of any premises (see below), the notice of objection shall be given with or before the notice in reply, unless the right to give it later is reserved by the notice in reply. If no notice in reply is served, the tenant can apply to the County Court

This Practice Note summarises the key time limits involved in exercising the statutory right (subject to statutory qualifying criteria) of a tenant who holds a long lease of a flat to buy a 90-year extension of the lease under the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 (LRHUDA 1993), and the consequences of failing to meet those time limits, including the time limits for service of a section 45 counter-notice, for service of the draft lease and responses, for applications to the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) (or Leasehold Valuation Tribunal (LVT) in Wales) and/or to the County Court. For more detailed guidance in respect of the LRHUDA 1993 lease extension procedure, see Practice Note: Guide to lease extensions of flats under the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993. Time Limits Below is a table which summarises, for ease of reference, the time limits contained in this Practice Note. Action Time Limit Sanction LRHUDA 1993 or related legislative provision Landlord

This Practice Note provides a summary of the relevant court/tribunal for issuing proceedings in respect of some of the most common property disputes-related applications, including applications to set aside statutory demands, opposed and unopposed Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 (LTA 1954) lease renewal proceedings, interim rent applications, assured and assured shorthold tenancy possession proceedings, light obstruction notice (LON) procedure, forfeiture proceedings, lease extension and collective enfranchisement (Leasehold Reform Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 and Leasehold Reform Act 1967) applications, boundary disputes, appeals against party wall awards, and trespasser (squatter) possession proceedings and/or trespasser injunction, enforcement of possession orders, Electronic Communications Code proceedings, modification of restrictive covenants, service charge dispensation application, terminal dilapidations proceedings, proceedings for unreasonable withholding of consent, and rent review arbitration appeals. Type of PD application Court/Tribunal Authority Further detail 1 Application to set aside a statutory demand served on an individual County Court, or in certain circumstances the High Court County Court: The Insolvency (England and Wales) Rules 2016 (IR 2016), SI 2016/1024,

An inheritance tax relief which applies to a transfer of value which attracts a second inheritance tax charge within a five-year period of the original gift.

Law360, London: Online payment company QuidPay Finance Ltd (QuidPay) had its legal costs stemming from its funds dispute with a fintech platform trimmed to USD400,000 on 19 August 2026, as Ashworth J said the award should be cut by a third for making allegations he deemed 'unsustainable'.

Law360, London: Wealth manager Quilter Plc said on 5 March 2025 that it has set aside £76m to compensate clients who did not get appropriate financial advice as it finalises an independent review for the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA).

Law360, London: Quinn Emanuel must reveal the source of the middleman that provided it with a forged report suggesting that Russian industrialist Oleg Deripaska misled arbitrators during a dispute with a former business partner, a judge ruled on 14 October 2024.

A loan arrangement giving rise to a trust of the money loaned to enable the borrower to carry out a specified purpose, resulting, if the purpose is performed, in a pure debtor-creditor relationship excluding any trust but in the event of non-performance by the borrower enabling the lender to rely on the loaned money as held on trust for the lender.