The Supreme Court has just handed down decisions in Day v Hosebay Ltd and de Walden Estate v Lexgorge Ltd  UKSC 41 on the meaning of ‘house’ as it is defined in the Leasehold Reform Act 1967. The Court allowed the landlord’s appeals holding that a building that is used for non-residential purposes is not a ‘house’ even though it was originally constructed as a house. The leaseholders in these cases do not therefore have the right to enfranchise and acquire the freehold. James has written a commentary for the Estates Gazette which will be published on 27 October 2012.
This case follows a decision of the Court of Appeal earlier this year which decided a building which was constructed as a block of flats is not a ‘house’. James’s commentary on this was published by the Estates Gazette on 26 May 2012.
_Professor James Driscoll
_A solicitor, an author and a Lawyer Chair of the Residential Property Tribunal. For 20 years he was a consultant solicitor with Trowers & Hamlins specialising in housing law. He has practised law since 1975.