Claimant Secures Right to Manage Property in First-tier Tribunal Ruling

OUTCOME: Allowed

© CROWN COPYRIGHT

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : LON/00AM/LRM/2025/0031 Property : [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] Applicant : [redacted] : [COMPANY] Respondent : [redacted] : N/A Type of [NAME] : [NAME] in relation to the denial of the Right to Manage under s.84(3) of the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 Tribunal : Tribunal Judge I Mohabir Date of decision : 10 February 2026

DECISION

2 Decisions of the Tribunal

(1) The Tribunal determines that the Applicant complied with the statutory

requirement to serve a Notice to Claim a Right to Acquire the Right to Manage

as required by section 78 of the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act

2002.

(2) The Tribunal determines that on 8 November 2025, the Applicant was

entitled to acquire the right to manage the premises pursuant to section

84(5)(a) of the Act, and the Applicant will acquire such right within three

months after this determination becomes final.

(3) The Tribunal determines that the Respondent shall pay the Applicant £114

within 28 days of this Decision being issued, in respect of the reimbursement

of the tribunal fees paid by the Applicant.

Background

1. Unless stated otherwise the page references in this decision are to the pages in

the hearing bundle.

2. On 1 September 2025, the Applicant issued this [NAME] under section

84(3) of the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 ("the Act") for a

decision that, on the relevant date, the Applicant [COMPANY] was entitled

to acquire the Right to Manage in relation to premises known as [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] (“the premises”). The premises is a

block of three self-contained apartments held on long residential leases, with a

commercial unit on the ground floor

3. By a Claim Notice dated 25 June 2025, the Applicant gave notice that it

intended to acquire the Right to Manage the Premises on 8 November 2025.

4. By a Counter Notice dated 5 August 2025 the Respondent [NAME] disputed

the claim, alleging that the Applicant was not entitled to acquire the right to

manage the premises for two reasons, which is considered in turn below:

(a) by reason of Section 82 of Chapter 1 of Part 2 of the Act, sufficient

information to support the claim has not been submitted in relation to

register of members as not all members are subscribing members.

(b) by reason of Section 72 and Schedule Six of Chapter 1 of Part 2 of the

Act, based on the available information, that the non-residential

(commercial) floor area of the building exceeds 50% of the total

internal floor area (excluding common parts), and, therefore, does not

satisfy the eligibility criteria set out under Section 72(1)(b) of the Act.

5. The [NAME] was accompanied by a Statement of Facts and Further

Particulars (at p.17). The Applicant asserted that the Respondent had acted

frivolously and vexatiously in opposing the [NAME] and appears to make

“an [NAME] for costs” (at p.22). It is not understood what [NAME] for

costs the Applicant is [NAME]. If it is an [NAME] under Rule 13 in the

3

Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rules 2013, then

it should be made expressly and clearly by the Applicant as a stand alone

[NAME].

6. Upon receipt of claim notice, on 14 July 2025 (at p.59), the Respondent had

requested extensive documentation. On 22 July 2025, the Applicant had

provided this (at p.60-62).

7. On 14 October 2025, the Tribunal gave Directions. The issue to be decided is,

namely whether on the date on which the notice of claim was given, the

Applicant was entitled to acquire the Right to Manage (“RTM”) of the

premises. It was directed that this matter could be determined on the papers

unless either party requested a hearing. Neither party has done so. The Judge

directed that the [NAME] form and the supporting documentation should

stand as the Applicant’s statement of case. Pursuant to the Directions, the

parties have filed the following:

(i) The Respondent’s Statement of Case (at p.106-107).

(ii) The Applicant’s Reply (at p.108-109).

(iii) A Bundle of Documents (122 pages).

8. The Tribunal’s determination took place on 10 February 2026 based on the

evidence contained in the hearing bundle.

Decision

Register of Members

9. The Respondent contended that the Applicant has asserted that all three

qualifying tenants of the premises are members of the [COMPANY].

However, the evidence provided shows that only two individuals are

subscribing members, being those who signed the memorandum of

association at incorporation. The Applicant has failed to produce any register

of members, as required under section 113 of the Companies Act 2006, or any

documentary evidence that the [NAME] has been admitted

as a member following incorporation.

10. Section 82(1) of the Act provides:

“A company which is a [COMPANY] in relation to any premises may give to

any person a notice requiring him to provide the company with any

information—

(a) which is in his possession or control, and

(b) which the company reasonably requires for ascertaining the particulars

required by or by virtue of section 80 to be included in a claim notice for

claiming to acquire the right to manage the premises”.

11. Section 113 of the Companies Act 2006 provides for the “Register of

members”:

“(1) Every company must keep a register of its members.

4

(2) There must be entered in the register: (a) the names and addresses of the

members; (b) the date on which each person was registered as a member, and

(c) the date at which any person ceased to be a member.

….

(7) If a company makes default in complying with this section an

offence is committed by (a) the company, and (b) every officer of

the company who is in default.

(8) A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable on summary

conviction to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale and, for

continued contravention, a daily default fine not exceeding one-tenth of level

3 on the standard scale.”

12. The Tribunal did not accept the Respondent’s argument as being correct as a

matter of law. The effect of section 113 of the Companies Act 2006 is that an

RTM is required to keep a register of its members. The Tribunal was satisfied

that there is no requirement for the Applicant to also keep a register of

subscriber members. The fact that only two subscriber members are named in

the Memorandum and Articles of Association (at p.25) is irrelevant.

13. The Tribunal found that the 3 participating leaseholders were in fact members

of the Applicant company when the Notice of claim was served on the

Respondent (at p.72). The Tribunal was, therefore, satisfied that the

requirement in section 113 was met.

14. The Tribunal was supported in this view because the same or similar point

raised by the Respondent has been taken in a number of earlier cases and

rejected (at pp.81, 91 and 99). Indeed, Upper Tribunal Judge Elizabeth Cooke

when refusing permission to appeal on the same point (at p.105) stated:

“the applicant ([NAME]) is not entitled to see membership applications.

There is no mention of such an entitlement in section 79 of the Commonhold

and Leasehold Reform Act 2002. The applicant is not entitled to delve into the

procedural background of the company; the FTT and the applicant must

accept its membership as shown on the [NAME]”.

Commercial Area Exceeds 50% of the Total Internal Area 15. The Respondent’s case on this point amounted to no more than a bare assertion in those terms.

16. The Applicant’s uncontroverted evidence was the measured floor plans of the internal area of the premises. What this demonstrated without doubt is that the total internal areas exceeded the commercial area by more than 50% and the Tribunal found in those terms. Costs 17. Given that the [NAME] has succeeded entirely, the Tribunal orders the

Respondent to reimburse the Applicant the sum of £114 under Rule 13(2) of

5

the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rules 2013

within 28 days of this decision being issued.

Conclusion

18. The Tribunal determines that the Applicant was on the relevant date

84(5)(a) of the Act.

Name: Tribunal Judge I Mohabir Date: 10 February 2026

Rights of appeal By rule 36(2) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rules 2013, the tribunal is required to notify the parties about any right of appeal they may have. If a party wishes to appeal this decision to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber), then a written [NAME] for permission must be made to the First-tier Tribunal at the regional office which has been dealing with the case. The [NAME] for permission to appeal must arrive at the regional office within 28 days after the tribunal sends written reasons for the decision to the [NAME]. If the [NAME] is not made within the 28-day time limit, such [NAME] must include a request for an extension of time and the reason for not complying with the 28-day time limit; the tribunal will then look at such reason(s) and decide whether to allow the [NAME] for permission to appeal to proceed, despite not being within the time limit. The [NAME] for permission to appeal must identify the decision of the tribunal to which it relates (i.e. give the date, the property and the case number), state the grounds of appeal and state the result the party [NAME] the [NAME] is seeking. If the tribunal refuses to grant permission to appeal, a further [NAME] for permission may be made to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).