Local Government analysis: The appeal concerned whether leaseholders who purchased flats under the right to buy scheme were liable to contribute towards the cost of remedial works addressing major structural defects and ensuring the buildings were safe for habitation. The Court of Appeal held that right to buy (RTB) leaseholders were not liable, via service charge, for works required to remedy an inherent large panel system structural defect. The case discusses the scope of a sweeper clause requiring the landlord to carry out works it considers necessary or advisable for the safety of the building and the catch all limb of total expenditure (eg ‘any other costs and expenses…in connection with the building’). It held that such clauses did not include making good a pre existing structural defect. Dismissing the appeal, the court emphasised orthodox contractual interpretation, caution against expanding general service charge words and critically that the RTB legislative scheme was relevant to the context of the clauses within the leases at issue. The decision strengthens protection for RTB leaseholders facing building safety remediation and provides practical guidance for landlords and local authorities on the limits of broad service charge drafting and recovery strategies. Written by Sarah Salmon and Luke Decker of Cornerstone Barristers.

STOP PRESS: The Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2025 (LR(S)A 2025) grants powers to the Scottish Ministers to make further regulations about the registration of the tenant’s interest in acquiring land. No such regulations have been made to date. LR(S)A 2025, s 16 makes prospective amendments to the agricultural tenant’s right-to-buy regime, including powers for the Scottish Ministers to make regulations concerning the registration of tenants’ interests in acquiring land. Section 15 has not yet been commenced and no regulations have been made. Agricultural tenants’ right to buy An agricultural tenant’s right to buy was introduced by the Agricultural Holdings (Scotland) Act 2003 (AH(S)A 2003). It is a ‘pre-emptive’ right rather than an ‘absolute right’ to buy as it can only be exercised by a tenant when the owner proposes to sell the tenanted land. This Practice Note sets out the right to buy as it was enacted under AH(S)A 2003. Only tenants with tenancies governed by the Agricultural Holdings (Scotland) Act 1991 (AH(S)A 1991) commonly referred to as ‘1991 Act tenancies’ (see

This Practice Note covers two of the existing community rights to buy in Scotland: • the community right to buy land under Part 2 of the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003 (LR(S)A 2003), and • asset transfer requests under the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act 2015 (CE(S)A 2015) The Scottish Government is undertaking a full review of the various community rights to buy which aims to recommend improvements, either legislative or procedural, to existing Community Right to Buy processes that will contribute to an increase in community ownership. The following timetable is proposed for the review: • phase 1—initial collection of evidence and views—was completed in Autumn 2024 • phase 2—assessment and development of proposals—was completed in Spring 2025 • phase 3—formal consultation—to be completed Autumn 2025 • phase 4—development of proposals—completed December 2025 with a view to any legislation required being ready to introduce early in the next parliamentary session Overview of land reform in Scotland The Scottish Government sees land as

Delay The landlord must complete parts of the right to buy process within certain time limits. If they fail to do so, a reduction in sale price may be argued. The relevant sections of the Housing Act 1985 (HA 1985) are ss 153A (tenant’s notices of delay) and 153B (payments of rent attributable to purchase price). The tenant can serve Form RTB6, the

What is the right to contest? The right to contest was launched by the Chief Secretary to the Treasury on 8 January 2014. It provides a mechanism for anyone to seek the sale of potentially surplus or redundant publicly owned land or buildings where they could be put to better economic use. Basic guidance on how the right operates and the process that applicants need to follow, including a standard application form, has been issued by the Treasury and the Cabinet Office. Purpose The government owns or occupies a significant amount of surplus or redundant land that Ministers believe could be put to better use. The right aims to exploit this source of previously inaccessible developed land. The government hopes that selling central and local government land or property that is not being used will help to free up sites that could be put to better economic use, boosting local growth—for example by creating new homes and stimulating business development. Who can use the right? Anyone can use the right to contest, including businesses, local authorities

The High Court in Lonsdale v National Westminster Bank Plc considered the extent to which it was possible to obtain disclosure and/or inspection of suspicious activity reports (SARs) in civil proceedings. The case demonstrates the power of the court to order the disclosure of these otherwise confidential documents despite objections that to do so might constitute an offence under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (POCA 2002). John Binns, partner, and Rosanna Cardona, solicitor, at BCL Solicitors LLP, consider the case.

Premises • Do the premises consist of a self-contained building or part of a building, with or without appurtenant property? • Do they contain two or more flats held by qualifying tenants? • Do qualifying tenants hold at least two-thirds of the total number of flats contained in the premises? • Is any part of the premises occupied or intended to be occupied other than for residential purposes? If so, is no more than 50% of the internal floor area of the whole premises in non-residential use (the internal floor area of any common parts being disregarded)? • Are the premises ‘excepted’ from the right to manage? • Is there already an RTM company in relation to the premises or to any premises containing or contained in the premises? See Practice Notes: The right to manage, The right to manage blocks of flats—establishing the right and The right to manage—what are qualifying premises. Qualifying tenants • Do the participating tenants hold qualifying ‘long leases’? • Do qualifying tenants who hold at least half of the total number of

Property analysis: The court held that a right to park had been acquired by prescription as this was the only lawful origin for the user relied on. The fact that it was subject to an earlier right of way did not matter.

Local Government analysis: Sarah Harris, senior associate (barrister) at Kingsley Napley LLP, examines the judgment in Tapster v Nursing and Midwifery Council. She assesses the significance of the case concerning the application of the rule for the re-opening of a determination (CPR 52.30) where a party seeks a statutory appeal to be re-opened.

The Home Office has updated its 'landlord’s guide to right to rent checks' document for recent changes.

This Practice Note considers the statutory right available to certain specified employees to make a request to their employer for study or training, under sections 63D to 63K of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (ERA 1996). The right applies only in relation to employers with 250 or more employees. The Practice Note examines affected employers and eligible employees. The statutory procedure for making and responding to applications is explained. Claims available to employees for breach of the rights that arise are considered, including claims for detriment and dismissal relating to the right. Certain specified employees have the statutory right to make a request to undertake study or training. This statutory right applies in relation to employees of employers with 250 or more employees who have sufficient qualifying service (see: Eligibility and qualifying period, below). The regime was initially expected to be extended to cover smaller employers but the government delayed implementation to allow time for further evaluation and examination of the potential impact it would have on smaller firms. There are no current proposals

A compliance check carried out by a prospective employer on their prospective employee to confirm if the individual can carry out the work in question by reason of their immigration status.