McHale v The Rt Hon Charles Gerald John Earl Cadogan [electronic resource]
Language: English Publication details: 2010Subject(s): Online resources: Summary: [2010] EWCA Civ 14, 21 January 2010. Appeal considers how to value a caretaker's flat in a property subject to enfranchisement. Should it be valued on the basis that it houses a caretaker rent free and is therefore of little value, or should it be valued on the basis that the tenants of the premises have to pay a service charge designed to provide compensation for that loss of rent? If the first option is taken, then the value of the leasehold interest is lower and the marriage value is higher; and vice versa. "Held": Appeal allowed. The headlease should be valued on the basis that Mr McHale (the headlessee) is entitled to be compensated in the service charge for the loss of rack rent on the caretaker flat.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | Virtual Online | ONLINE PUBLICATION (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 149607-2001 |
[2010] EWCA Civ 14, 21 January 2010. Appeal considers how to value a caretaker's flat in a property subject to enfranchisement. Should it be valued on the basis that it houses a caretaker rent free and is therefore of little value, or should it be valued on the basis that the tenants of the premises have to pay a service charge designed to provide compensation for that loss of rent? If the first option is taken, then the value of the leasehold interest is lower and the marriage value is higher; and vice versa. "Held": Appeal allowed. The headlease should be valued on the basis that Mr McHale (the headlessee) is entitled to be compensated in the service charge for the loss of rack rent on the caretaker flat.