000			01815cab a2200241 4500
001			L130982
008			050920n2005 000 0 eng u
035			_a(Sirsi) u130982
041	0		_aeng
100	1		_aJones, Simon
245			_aTug-of-war over costs
260			_c2005
490			_aEstates Gazette _v(0536) 10 September 2005, 274-275(2)
520			_aConsiders the new, albeit limited power introduced under the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 Sched 12 para 10 (4) for leasehold valuation tribunals (LVTs) to award costs in LVT applications. Describes how it has led to conflicting judgments in two recent cases: "Schilling v Canary Riverside Developments PTE Ltd" ([2005] PLSCS 102, L130219) and "Staghold v Takeda" ([2005] PLSCS 160)."Schilling" held that this provision would significantly restrict a landlord's right to recover any legal or professional fees incurred in connection with the LVT application whereas "Staghold" concluded that para 10(4) did not preclude the landlord's contractual right to recover legal and professional costs incurred in previous LVT and Lands Tribunal proceedings as a service charge. Both cases will probably be appealed. If "Schilling" is upheld, landlords will have to defend unmeritorious claims by leaseholders without being able to recover the costs of defending the claim.
590			_aIKA270905
650			_aSCHILLING V CANARY RIVERSIDE DEVELOPMENT
650			_aUNFAIR TERMS IN CONSUMER CONTRACTS REGULATIONS 1999 REG 5(2)
650			_aCOMMONHOLD AND LEASEHOLD REFORM ACT 2002 SCHED 12 PARA 10(4
650			_aLANDLORD AND TENANT ACT 1985 S20C
650			_aSTAGHOLD V TAKEDA
690			_aMANAGEMENT- DISPUTE AVOIDANCE, MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-DISPUTE MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-TRIBUNALS-LEASEHOLD VALUATION TRIBUNALS
942			_n0
999			_c75897 _d75897