First-tier Tribunal Determines Freehold Premium for Long-Lease Property
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal decided on the amount to be paid for acquiring the freehold of a property with a very long lease. They considered the ground rent and the remaining lease term to determine the premium.
⚖️ Legal holding
When determining the premium for acquiring the freehold of a property with an extremely long lease, the tribunal considers the valuation of the ground rent and the unexpired term.
📖 Technical summary
The tribunal determined the premium for acquiring the freehold of a property with an extremely long lease.
📜 Headnote Official document
The tribunal determined the premium for acquiring the freehold of a property with an extremely long lease, considering the valuation of the ground rent and the unexpired term. The decision was made in the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) on 22nd January 2019.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
© CROWN COPYRIGHT
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : LON/00AY/OCE/2018/0292 Property : 11 St. Martin’s [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicant : [redacted] : [COUNSEL] Respondent : [redacted] Representative : N/A Type of [NAME] : Enfranchisement – missing landlord Tribunal member(s) : Judge [NAME] and venue of hearing (paper) : 22nd January 2019 at 10 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Date of decision :
22nd January 2019
DECISION
2
Decisions of the tribunal (1) The tribunal determines that the premium payable by the Applicants is £110 (one hundred and ten pounds) excluding costs. The [NAME]
1. The Applicants seek a determination pursuant to the direction of the county court sitting at Wandsworth dated 31 August 2018, remitting this matter to the first-tier tribunal, of the premium payable for the acquisition of the freehold of the subject property. Background 2 In an [NAME] to the count court the Applicants seek to acquire the freehold of the subject property, a mid-terrace Victorian house held pursuant to a lease dated 11 June 1580 for a term of 1000 years at a ground rent of £6.13. The freehold interest of the property is unregistered but the leasehold interest is registered under Title Number LN211688 [GR1/1-3].
3. On 31st August 2018 the county court made an order vesting the freehold interest in the subject property in the Applicants, having been satisfied it was entitled to do so, despite the absence and unknown identity of the landlord. The matter was then remitted to the tribunal for a determination of the premium payable by the Applicants for the acquisition of the freehold. Evidence 4. The tribunal was provided with an expert witness report from [NAME] dated 22nd November 2018, which addressed the long-lease length; the extreme length of the remaining unexpired term (561.78 years) as the valuation date of 11th June 2018 and the ground rent of £6.67 per annum (at current values). The report also addressed the lack of comparable sales which, was attributed to the depressed London market although referred to No. 6 St. Martin’s Road with an asking price of £1,400,000 in August 2018 but subsequently withdrawn from sale. Mr. [NAME] stated in his report that in his opinion that even if the freehold vacant possession value was £1,500,000 or £15,000,000 the effect of having to defer the landlord’s interest for 562 years at 4.75% realises a value at today’s figures of £0. Consequently, the total diminution of the freeholder’s interest is only made up of the capitalised ground rent.
5. In his report Mr. [NAME] referred to a deed dated 22nd October 1962 which refers to the rent not being paid for 240 years. The
3 Applicants purchased the existing lease on 22nd November 1978 and have not received demands for or paid any ground rent since acquiring their leasehold interest. Therefore, Mr. [NAME] capitalised the ground rent that might be considered due, having regard to the operation of The Limitation Act 1980, as £110 allowing for an accumulation of ground rent of six years. The tribunal’s decision and reasons 6. Having regard to the unusual circumstances of this [NAME] and the extremely long lease and its unexpired term, the tribunal is satisfied that Mr. [NAME] has properly addressed all issues relating to this valuation as are necessary in an appropriate and reasonable fashion. In the absence of any evidence to the contrary and drawing upon its own expert knowledge and experience, the tribunal concurs with Mr. [NAME] approach and valuation. Therefore, the tribunal determines that the premium payable by the Applicants for the acquisition of the freehold is £110 (one hundred and ten pounds). The tribunal now remits this matter to the country court at Wandsworth for any final orders.
Name: Judge Tagliavini Date: 22nd January 2019
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.
4 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).
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Emergency Repairs Dispensation Without Consultat…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Rejects Administrative Fees for Ground Rent Collection
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Fire Safety Works
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Granted Permission for Urgent Roof Repairs Without Consultation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Granted Dispensation for Urgent Works to Prevent Water Ingress
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Drainage Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Market Rent Determination for Sheltered Housing Tenants
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants Urgent Works Dispensation Without Consultation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Communal Door Lock Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Allows Urgent Roof Repairs Without Consultation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Management Company Granted Permission to Skip Consultation for Urgent Repai…
A snapshot of this collection — not a prediction of your case's outcome.
⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this
✅ Tends to be accepted
- The premium for acquiring the freehold was determined to be £110, excluding costs.
- The county court had already ordered the freehold interest to be vested in the applicants, despite the landlord's absence.
- The expert's valuation properly addressed the extremely long lease and its unexpired term.
- The expert's opinion that the landlord's interest, deferred for 562 years, has a present value of £0 was accepted.
- The capitalised ground rent, allowing for six years of accumulation under the Limitation Act 1980, was £110.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
It decided the premium for acquiring the freehold of a property with a very long lease.
Who was involved?
The claimant sought to acquire the freehold of their property, while the landlord's identity was unknown.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided that the premium should be £110, considering the long lease term and the ground rent.
Which laws or rules were applied?
No specific laws or rules were mentioned in the decision.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The valuation of the ground rent and the long unexpired term were crucial in determining the premium.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was in favour of the claimant.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should consider the long-term lease and ground rent when calculating the premium.
What evidence or documents mattered?
An expert witness report on the valuation of the property was important.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, a decision like this can be appealed to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is recommended to get legal advice from a qualified solicitor for cases involving property law.
