000			01895cad a22002295a 4500
001			L140963
008			110901e20070521xxk f v 000 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u140963
041	0		_aeng
245	0	0	_a(1) Pitts and another v Earl Cadogan (2) Earl Cadogan v Atlantic Telecasters Ltd _h[electronic resource]
260			_c2007
520			_a[2007] EWLands LRA_4_2007 (21 May 2007), 21 May 2007. Considers the price to be paid by tenants on leasehold enfranchisement claims. In both cases the landlords argued that an element of hope value should be contained within the valuation to reflect the option that it would otherwise have to sell the freehold or a leasehold extension in the future. The landlords submitted that determination of the open market value should be made, including hope value; that marriage value should be calculated as the difference between that sum and the value of possession of the freehold; and that the difference should be attributed between the landlord and tenant. "Held": Under the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 s9(1D) an even sharing of marriage value between landlord and tenant is prescribed. This provision, in the absence of reference to hope value, implies that the marriage value is to be decided without hope value. There is no basis in law for the provision of hope value. Judgment to the tenants Pitts and another and Atlantic Telecasters Ltd.
590			_aKA
650	2	4	_aLEASEHOLD REFORM ACT 1967
650	2	4	_aEARL CADOGAN AND ANOTHER V SPORTELLI AND ANOTHER
650	2	4	_aPITTS AND ANOTHER V EARL CADOGAN
650	2	4	_aEARL CADOGAN V ATLANTIC TELECASTERS LTD
651		4	_aEngland and Wales _y1543-
690			_aPROPERTY-LEASEHOLD PROPERTY-LANDLORD AND TENANT-LEASES-LEASEHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT
856	4	0	_uhttps://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWLands/2007/LRA_4_2007.html _zView the judgment free of charge at www.bailii.org
942			_n0
999			_c79396 _d79396