Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2012] All ER (D) 81 (Oct)
Neutral Citation: [2012] UKSC 41
Court: Supreme Court
Judge:

Lord Phillips, Lord Walker, Lord Mance, Lord Clarke, Lord Wilson, Lord Sumption and Lord Carnwath

Representation Edwin Johnson QC and Oliver Phillips (instructed by Pemberton Greenish) for the landlord in the first case.
  Jonathan Gaunt QC and Katharine Holland QC (instructed by Speechly Bircham LLP) for the landlords in the second case.
  Stephen Jourdan QC and Anthony Radevsky (instructed by Boodle Hatfield & Wallace LLP) for the leaseholders in the first case.
  Anthony Radevsky and Mark Sefton (instructed by Wallace LLP) for the leaseholders in the second case.
Judgment Dates: 10 October 2012

Catchwords

Landlord and tenant - Leasehold enfranchisement - House - Building designed or adapted for living in and reasonably so called - Meaning of 'designed or adapted for living in' - House reasonably so called - Relevance of use - s°2(1).

The Case

Landlord and tenant Leasehold enfranchisement. In two separate appeals the Supreme Court explored the meaning and effect of of the Leasehold Reform Act 1967, and determined the question of what constituted a 'house' within the meaning of that section.

Practice Areas

If you are a LexisLibrary subscriber you can read more about this case here.