I own a flat and a garage held under separate, long leases in
the same development. I would like to extend the leases of both my
flat and garage but understand that in order to be eligible to make
a claim for a statutory lease extension, the property must be a
flat. Does that mean that I can't bring a statutory claim to
extend my garage lease?
The short answer is that you may be able to bring a claim to
extend your leases of both your flat and your garage together.
A claim for a lease extension under the provisions of the
Leasehold Reform Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 relates to
a “flat” held on a long lease.
For the purposes of a lease extension under the 1993 Act, the
definition of a “flat” is specifically broadened to
include any garage belonging to or usually enjoyed with the flat
and “let to the tenant with the flat”.
A garage is “let with the flat” if it is either
demised to the tenant under the same lease or demised to the tenant
under separate leases which, for the purposes of section 7(6) of
the 1993 Act, are treated as a single lease with the lease of the
Section 7(6) of the 1993 Act provides that where there are two
leases, with the same landlord and tenant, and one of those leases
contains a flat, and the other lease contains 'appurtenant
property', the two leases are to be viewed as a single lease
for the purposes of the 1993 Act. Appurtenant property includes a
Therefore, the fact that your flat and garage are held under
separate leases should not prevent you from extending the leases
relating to both properties provided that the requirements of
Section 7(6) are met. However, it is unlikely that you would be
able to extend the garage lease alone under the 1993 Act on the
basis that it is not a dwelling.
It is important that your solicitor takes care to ensure that
all appurtenant property belonging to or usually enjoyed with the
flat (such as an outhouse, garden or yard) is included in your
claim for a statutory lease extension.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
The Technology and Construction Court (TCC) decided that the costs of claims consultants assisting in adjudication enforcement proceedings can be recovered as disbursements, assuming that those consultants acted in the adjudication.
The requirements of a valid payment notice issued under a construction contract were considered in a previous update: "A Payment Notice? Be Clear?" with reference to the case of Surrey and Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust v Logan Construction (South East) Ltd  ("Surrey and Sussex") a decision of the English High Court.
VL's appeal was against a decision by LBC on a review of an earlier refusal to provide VL and her family with housing on the grounds that she was not homeless, or threatened with homelessness, finding she had accommodation available to her in Portugal.
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).