The Earl Cadogan has lost a high court appeal in an enfranchisement dispute with tenants of a
Yesterday high court judge Roth dismissed the Earl’s appeal in favour of tenants Dimitris Panagopoulos and John Stephenson.
In April 2006, three of the five tenants of
The Earl served a counternotice and, in March 2007, notified the tenants of his intention to grant a lease of the basement caretaker’s flat at a peppercorn rent to a nominee, Cadogan Estates Ltd.
Following the grant of the lease and an application to register it at the Land Registry, the tenants objected on the grounds that the lease was void and they were entitled to acquire the freehold of the entire property under the April 2006 notice.
Deciding the matter as a preliminary issue, Judge Marshall held that the grant of the lease was contrary to section 19(1)(a)(ii) of the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 because it was a lease including “common parts” and furthermore was a disposal of the freeholder’s interest and was therefore void.
The judge also held that the grant of the lease was a disposal “severing” the Earl’s freehold interest and was therefore void under section 19(1)(a)(i) of the 1993 Act.
Giving judgment on the appeal, Mr Justice Roth ruled that while contrary to the judge’s view the lease did not fall within the scope of section 19(1)(a)(i) the appeal would still be dismissed as the lease was void for the other reasons given by the judge.
