ARTICLE
10 July 2025

Ronald Fletcher Baker LLP & Selborne Chambers Secure Permission To Appeal In Insurance Premium Case

RF
Ronald Fletcher Baker

Contributor

For over 75 years, Ronald Fletcher Baker LLP has been providing expert legal advice from its offices in London, Manchester, and Exeter. The firm has considerable experience in acting for medium to large national and international companies, governments, financial institutions, high net worth individuals, families, and corporate investors, many of whom are based overseas.

In a significant development for the commercial property sector, the High Court has granted permission to appeal in London Trocadero (2015) LLP v Picturehouse Cinemas Ltd. The legal team at Ronald Fletcher Baker LLP...
United Kingdom Real Estate and Construction

In a significant development for the commercial property sector, the High Court has granted permission to appeal in London Trocadero (2015) LLP v Picturehouse Cinemas Ltd. The legal team at Ronald Fletcher Baker LLP, assisted Nicholas Trompeter KC of Selborne Chambers, to successfully argue for the appeal, which will now proceed to the Court of Appeal. The case confronts a surprising High Court decision that challenges decades of established market practice regarding insurance premiums and landlord-retained commissions.

The appeal, led by Partners Rudi Ramdarshan, Victoria Huxley, and Associate Nii-Amaa Ollennu of Ronald Fletcher Baker LLP, will provide critical clarity on practices that have been a cornerstone of the UK commercial property market since at least the 1970s.

The High Court Decision

The High Court's initial finding turned on a narrow interpretation of the word "premium" in a lease granted in 1994. The Court held that commissions retained by a landlord did not form part of the "premium payable... for keeping the Centre insured".

This finding, however, runs contrary to the shared view of the insurance experts for both sides in the case, who agreed that in insurance industry terminology, commission is considered part of the gross premium.

Receiving and retaining insurance commissions was a widespread and long-standing feature of the UK commercial property market, particularly at the time the original lease was granted in 1994.

It was common for large institutional landlords to arrange commission via a "block policy" that covers multiple properties. This scale provides significant negotiating leverage that an individual tenant could never hope to achieve. Landlords can access specialist insurers, secure more favourable terms, and potentially achieve more competitive net premiums. Landlords are able to leverage their portfolio's scale to deliver a superior insurance product to their tenants.

While the tenants contribute to the commission, the overall package—comprising the net premium, the breadth of coverage, and the commission—in many cases represents a better value proposition than what the tenant could secure independently in the open market. This can be particularly the case in complex and high-risk sites in Prime London.

The Appeal

The court will address whether "premium", as understood in the market and by the parties at the time the lease was granted, includes the full gross premium, which includes commissions, whether shared or not.

In addition, the Court of Appeal will consider whether it is appropriate to imply a "Havenridge Implied Term" into professionally drafted leases and, if so, what its scope should be. An important question to be answered is whether a counterfactual enquiry needs to be made as to what a landlord my receive in a "normal" arm's length negotiation under such an implied term.

Further the Court of Appeal will address, what was the basis of payments which had historically been made and the proper scope of a tenant's claim in restitution.

The High Court's finding surprised many in the industry, as it challenged a market practice that has been in place since at least the 1970s. It is therefore right that the Court of Appeal will now address these important questions on the meaning of "premium", implied terms, and the scope of any claim in restitution. Nicholas Trompeter KC was instrumental in securing permission for this appeal, instructed by Rudi Ramdarshan, Victoria Huxley and Nii- Amaa Ollennu of Ronald Fletcher Baker LLP.

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.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More