Raymond Martin v Medina Housing Association Ltd
Language: English Publication details: 2006Subject(s):- HOUSING ACT 1985 S122(3)
- HOUSING ACT 1985 S122
- HOUSING ACT 1985 S123
- HOUSING ACT 1985 S138(1)
- HOUSING ACT 1985 PART V
- MARTIN V MEDINA HOUSING ASSOCIATION LTD
- DANCE V WELWYN HATFIELD
- COLLIN V DUKE OF WESTMINSTER AND ANOTHER
- LAW OF PROPERTY ACT 1925 S53(1)
- England and Wales -- 1543-
- PROPERTY-RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY-LEASEHOLD RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY-RESIDENTIAL LANDLORD AND TENANT-RESIDENTIAL LEASES-RESIDENTIAL LEASEHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT
| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | Virtual Online | ONLINE PUBLICATION (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 133603-2001 |
Browsing Virtual shelves, Shelving location: Online Close shelf browser (Hides shelf browser)
| No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | ||
| ONLINE PUBLICATION Commission of the European Communities v United Kingdom | ONLINE PUBLICATION Basildon District Council v Wahlen | ONLINE PUBLICATION Emmanuel Cook and JD Wetherspoon PLC | ONLINE PUBLICATION Raymond Martin v Medina Housing Association Ltd | ONLINE PUBLICATION Captiva Estates Ltd v Rybarn Ltd | ONLINE PUBLICATION Julie Hickey v Haringey London Borough Council | ONLINE PUBLICATION Protech Projects Construction (Pty) Ltd v Al-Kharafi and Sons Al-Kharafi and Sons v Big Dig Construction (Pty) Ltd |
[2006] EWCA Civ 367, 31 March 2006. Considers whether a tenant can later exercise the right to buy when he had earlier expressly abandoned his right to buy and had not acquired any equitable interest in the property. Appeal by MA against a decision refusing his application for an injunction requiring ME to convey to him its freehold interest in a property of which he was the tenant. MA proposed to exercise the right to buy the property 13 years after the notice claiming the right to buy had been served, a right disputed by ME. "Held": appeal dismissed. A withdrawal of a right to buy notice within the meaning of the 1985 Act had to be in writing. In the instant case there been an express abandonment on MA's part generated by the serving of the notice under s122 and MA and his mother had expressly released themselves from their obligations under Part V of the Act. It was proven that in 1990 MA had no equitable interest in the property.