VadeLab
DismissedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Tenant Ordered to Pay £5044.50 in Statutory Costs for New Lease

Case No.

📌 In brief

In a recent case, the First-tier Tribunal decided that a tenant must pay the landlord's reasonable costs related to obtaining a new lease. The total cost came to £5044.50 plus VAT, covering legal fees, valuation fees, and other expenses.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to pay reasonable costs associated with the grant of a new lease under the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002.

Topics

costsleasehold reformstatutory costs

Provisions

Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 s.60

📖 Technical summary

The tribunal determined that the tenant was liable for the landlord's reasonable costs associated with granting a new lease.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal ruled that the tenant was liable for reasonable costs associated with the grant of a new lease, including legal fees, valuation fees, and disbursements, totaling £5044.50 plus VAT.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Dismissed

1

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL [NAME] (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : LON/OOBK/OC9/2024/0097 Applicant: [redacted] Respondent : [redacted] : 108, [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Tribunal : Judge Shepherd Date of decision : 22nd January 2025

DETERMINATION

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2025

1. The Applicant, [APPELLANT] ("The Applicant"), is the freehold owner of premises known as Park West and 85-[ADDRESS], Paddington, London ("the Premises") of which [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] ("the Flat") forms part.

2. The Respondent holds a long lease of the Flat for a term of 125 years from the 25 December 1978.

3. On 10 May 2023, the Respondent made an [NAME] for the grant of new Lease by way of Notice of Claim pursuant to the provisions of Chapter II of the Act.

4. On 18 July 2023, [APPELLANT] served a Counter-Notice pursuant to Section 45 of the Act admitting the Respondent's entitlement to the grant of a new lease for the Flat.

2

5. On or about 11 January 2024 the Respondent made an [NAME] to the [NAME] seeking the determination of the terms of acquisition of a new lease of the Flat. The terms of acquisition of a new lease of Flat were subsequently agreed between the parties on 17 January 2024.

6. The Respondent failed to complete a new lease within the required statutory time period pursuant to the provision of Section 48 of the Act and accordingly the Notice of Claim was deemed withdrawn pursuant to Section 53 of the Act on 16 May 2024.

7. Statutory costs have not been agreed and accordingly on or about 19 July 2024, [APPELLANT]'s Solicitors made an [NAME] to the [NAME] seeking determination of statutory costs payable pursuant to Section 60.

8. [APPELLANT] are seeking costs of £3,673 plus VAT in connection with [APPELLANT]'s legal costs (plus disbursements of £12 plus VAT for Land Registry fees and £9.50 plus VAT in courier fees) and £1,350 plus VAT for valuer's fees.

9. A statement of costs was provided to the Respondent on 20 September 2024 pursuant to the Tribunal’s directions dated 3 September 2024.

The Law

10. Section 60 of the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 provides that the Respondent shall be liable for reasonable costs of and incidental to any of the following matters, namely:-

"(a) Any investigation reasonably undertaken of the Tenant's right to a new lease;

(b) Any valuation of the tenant's Flat obtained for the purpose of fixing the premium or any other amount payable by virtue of Schedule 13 in connection with the grant of a new lease under Section 56;

(c) The grant of a new Lease under that Section... "

Determination 11. I have considered this [NAME] and can find no basis to reject the Applicant’s claim for costs namely: £3673 plus vat – legal fees £12 plus vat – land registry fees £9.50 plus vat – courier fees £1350 plus vat – valuation fees

Total - £5044.50 plus vat

12. These sums are reasonable and payable.

3

Judge Shepherd

22nd January 2025

Rights of appeal By rule 36(2) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) ([NAME]) 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] should be made on Form RP PTA available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/form-rp-pta-[NAME]-for- permission-to-appeal-a-decision-to-the-upper-tribunal-lands-chamber 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).

1

AMENDED DETERMINATION Under Rule 50 of the Tribunal Procedure ( First Tier Tribunal) ([NAME]) Rules 2013

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2025

2

The Law

10. Section 60 of the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002Leasehold Reform, Housing and Development Act 1993 provides that the Respondent shall be liable for reasonable costs of and incidental to any of the following matters, namely:-

(c) The grant of a new Lease under that Section... "

3

Total - £5044.50 plus vat

12. These sums are reasonable and payable.

Judge Shepherd

22nd January19th February 2025

📊 How courts decide similar cases

Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:

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

  • Tenant contributions to service charges are capped at £250 without proper consultation.
  • Landlords can be exempt from consultation requirements if the works are urgent and necessary.
  • An RTM company can acquire management rights if it meets statutory requirements.
  • A landlord must address fire safety defects as per the Building Safety Act 2022.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • The court dismissed claims where tenants failed to challenge defective notices of rent increases.
  • Claims involving unreasonable conduct leading to wasted costs orders were dismissed if the tenant was already facing significant consequences.

Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The Tribunal ruled that the Respondent must pay £5044.50 plus VAT in statutory costs to the Applicant.

What was the dispute about?

The dispute was over the statutory costs incurred by the Applicant when the Respondent failed to complete a new lease within the statutory time period.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided that the Respondent must pay the statutory costs because the failure to complete the lease within the statutory time period led to the withdrawal of the claim.

Which laws or rules were applied?

Section 60 of the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 was applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that mattered most was that the Respondent had failed to complete the lease within the statutory time period, thus triggering the statutory costs under Section 60.

Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?

The decision was against the person who brought the case, as the Respondent was ordered to pay the statutory costs.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation should ensure that they complete any necessary actions within the statutory time period to avoid incurring statutory costs.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The evidence and documents that mattered included the original notice of claim, counter-notice, and the agreement on the terms of acquisition of a new lease.

Official source: First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) — headnote and full judgment reproduced from the court's public records. View on the official source ↗Summary, holding, technical summary and questions: produced by Artificial Intelligence based on the official headnote and judgment. These are VadeLab’s own material and are not the work of the Court.This decision was issued by the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) and is reproduced from its published records. VadeLab is not affiliated with, and this page is not endorsed by, that court or tribunal.