Image from Google Jackets

De Campomar and another v Trustees of the Pettiward Estate

Language: English Series: Estates Gazette ; [2005] 15 EG 124-126(3)Publication details: 2005Subject(s): Online resources: Summary: [2004] EWHC LT, 1 March 2005. Considers whether a Leasehold Valuation Tribunal (LVT) has the jurisdiction to dismiss a tenant's application for determination of disputed premiums and terms as an abuse of the LVT's process pursuant to its power under the Rent Assessment Committee (England and Wales) (Leasehold Valuation Tribunal) Regulations 1993 reg. 4B. Appeal by tenants (D) against the LVT's decision to strike out their application for the determination of the terms of new leases to be granted by the respondent landlord (P) under the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 s42. Both parties agreed the disputed premiums prior to the LVT hearing date and applied for an adjournment because other terms were still the subject of negotiation. The LVT vacated the hearing and threatened to dismiss the application if it did not hear from the parties by a certain date. "Held": appeal allowed. The LVT has the power to enforce its rules and suppress any abuses of its process by dismissing applications but this did not accord with the requirements of justice in this case. The LVT must give specific notice of its intention to exercise its striking-out power unless cause could be shown to the contrary and an opportunity has been given to show cause.
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number Copy number Status Barcode
Law report London Journal article L129659 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) 1 Available 129659-1001

[2004] EWHC LT, 1 March 2005. Considers whether a Leasehold Valuation Tribunal (LVT) has the jurisdiction to dismiss a tenant's application for determination of disputed premiums and terms as an abuse of the LVT's process pursuant to its power under the Rent Assessment Committee (England and Wales) (Leasehold Valuation Tribunal) Regulations 1993 reg. 4B. Appeal by tenants (D) against the LVT's decision to strike out their application for the determination of the terms of new leases to be granted by the respondent landlord (P) under the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 s42. Both parties agreed the disputed premiums prior to the LVT hearing date and applied for an adjournment because other terms were still the subject of negotiation. The LVT vacated the hearing and threatened to dismiss the application if it did not hear from the parties by a certain date. "Held": appeal allowed. The LVT has the power to enforce its rules and suppress any abuses of its process by dismissing applications but this did not accord with the requirements of justice in this case. The LVT must give specific notice of its intention to exercise its striking-out power unless cause could be shown to the contrary and an opportunity has been given to show cause.