A second-class power
Series: Estates Gazette ; (0234) 24 August 2002, 83(1)Publication details: 2002Subject(s): Summary: Argues that a case last year involving a service charge, R (on the application of Daejan Properties Ltd) v London Leasehold Valuation Tribunal illustrates that the jurisidction enjoyed by leasehold valuation tribunals is strictly limited. Reviews the decision in Wandsworth LBC v Manuel which centred on the jurisdiction of the tribunals and whether the proceedings at issue should be transferred to a LVT. Key points include that the LVT can only consider the reasonableness of the costs of services and of the standard to which they are provided. Also, the tribunal cannot rule on whether the services fall within the terms of the lease or whether the statutory consultation procedure has been followed.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journal article | London Journal article | ABS65895 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 119576-1001 |
Argues that a case last year involving a service charge, R (on the application of Daejan Properties Ltd) v London Leasehold Valuation Tribunal illustrates that the jurisidction enjoyed by leasehold valuation tribunals is strictly limited. Reviews the decision in Wandsworth LBC v Manuel which centred on the jurisdiction of the tribunals and whether the proceedings at issue should be transferred to a LVT. Key points include that the LVT can only consider the reasonableness of the costs of services and of the standard to which they are provided. Also, the tribunal cannot rule on whether the services fall within the terms of the lease or whether the statutory consultation procedure has been followed.