000 02268cam a2200289 4500
001 ABS67000
008 030829n2003 000 0 eng u
035 _a(Sirsi) u123399
245 _aJohn Lyon's Charity v Shalson
_h[electronic resource]
260 _c2003
490 _aEstates Gazette
_v[2003] 27 EG 339 139-145(7)
520 _a[2003] UKHL 32, 12 June 2003. Appeal by tenant (S) from a CA judgment ([2002] EWCA Civ 538 Abs65746) on appeal from LT, holding that a re-conversion of flats into a house could not constitute an improvement increasing its value under the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 s9(1A)(d) because it reversed a previous conversion of the house into flats. "Held", appeal allowed. The works that had re-converted the property into a single dwelling, constituted improvements within s9(1A)(d) of the Act and their value fell to be disregarded in determining the enfranchisement price. In order to rely on the improvement disregard, S had to identify the improvements carried out at his and his predecessors in title's expense and satisfy the tribunal that, but for those improvements, the premises would be worth less. The word improvement refers to a physical not an economic concept. The earlier conversion into flats made no difference to the value of the house at valuation date as they had ceased to exist. If the later re-conversion had not taken place, the earlier improvements would have still existed and the dwelling would have been worth less. To the extent that it was worth more, S was entitled to a reduction in the open market value. View judgment at www.publications.parliament.uk. (See also Abs67002).
590 _aABS
650 _aLEASEHOLD VALUATION TRIBUNALS
650 _aRESTRICTIVE COVENANTS
650 _aDISREGARDS
650 _aRECONVERSION
650 _aLEASEHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT
650 _aHOUSE CONVERSIONS
650 _aFREEHOLD
650 _aLEASEHOLD REFORM ACT 1967 S9(1A)(D)
650 _aLEASEHOLD REFORM ACT 1967 S21(1A)
650 _aJOHN LYON'S CHARITY V SHALSON
690 _aLANDLORD AND TENANT-LEASEHOLD REFORM-CASE LAW
856 _uhttps://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200203/ldjudgmt/jd030612/lyon-1.htm
_zView the judgment at www.publications.parliament.uk
942 _n0
999 _c73298
_d73298