Wandle Housing Association Limited v Natalie Stevens (Leases and licenses : Validity of leases) [2017] UKFTT 802 (PC) (02 October 2017)


BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?

No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!



BAILII [Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]

England and Wales Land Registry Adjudicator


You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales Land Registry Adjudicator >> Wandle Housing Association Limited v Natalie Stevens (Leases and licenses : Validity of leases) [2017] UKFTT 802 (PC) (02 October 2017)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWLandRA/2017/2017_0114.html
Cite as: [2017] UKFTT 802 (PC)

[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]



Wandle Housing Association Limited v Natalie Stevens (Leases and licenses : Validity of leases) [2017] EWLandRA 2017_0114 (02 October 2017)


Neutral Citation Number: [2017] UKFTT 802 (PC). Strike out application. 'Shared ownership' lease permitting the tenant to acquire a share of the reversion by making additional rental payments. The tenant was made bankrupt and the trustee disclaimed the lease. Application to close the leasehold title. The primary objection was that a 'shared ownership' lease should be treated as an Assured Tenancy (Richardson v Midland Heart Limited [2008] L & T LR 31, High Court). An Assured Tenancy does not form part of the bankrupt's estate and therefore the trustee's right to disclaim does not apply to it. However, Applicant Landlord relied on Rule 6.185 of the Insolvency Rules 1986, which presumes a disclaimer to be valid and effective unless proven otherwise. The only proper way of challenging the trustee's disclaimer was by application to the bankruptcy court, and this had not been done. Furthermore, the Landlord also alleged that Respondent did not occupy the demised premises as her sole residence and therefore her lease did not qualify as an Assured Tenancy. Respondent's case was struck out and the Applicant's application succeeded.


A HTML version of this file is not available click here or view below the pdf version : [2017] UKFTT 802 (PC)


BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWLandRA/2017/2017_0114.html