West Hampstead Management Property Co Ltd v Pearl Property Ltd
Series: Estates Gazette Law Reports ; [2002] 45 EG 155-161(7) | Court of Appeal (Civil Division) ; [2002] EWCA Civ 1372Publication details: 2002Subject(s): Summary: CA 26 July 2002. The appellant company (W) was the nominee purchaser set up by three of the lessees of a block of flats in order to acquire the freehold reversion under the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993. The leasehold valuation tribunal set the price payable for the freehold at £450 000, based upon a valuation date of 22 February 2000. Previously the nominee purchaser had sought a determination of £390 000 based on a valuation date of 5 May 1999. The respondent landlord (P) had sought a price of £605 000 based upon a date of 22 February 2000. The Lands Tribunal dismissed W's appeal and allowed P's cross-appeal, determining the price at £519 000, deciding "inter alia" that the valuation date was 22 February 2000. W appealed, arguing that the valuation date was 5 May 1999. "Held", the appeal was dismissed.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | X120660 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 120660-1001 |
CA 26 July 2002. The appellant company (W) was the nominee purchaser set up by three of the lessees of a block of flats in order to acquire the freehold reversion under the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993. The leasehold valuation tribunal set the price payable for the freehold at £450 000, based upon a valuation date of 22 February 2000. Previously the nominee purchaser had sought a determination of £390 000 based on a valuation date of 5 May 1999. The respondent landlord (P) had sought a price of £605 000 based upon a date of 22 February 2000. The Lands Tribunal dismissed W's appeal and allowed P's cross-appeal, determining the price at £519 000, deciding "inter alia" that the valuation date was 22 February 2000. W appealed, arguing that the valuation date was 5 May 1999. "Held", the appeal was dismissed.