Claims for judicial review were brought by claimants including those representing large investment funds, the London ‘Great Estates’ (the Cadogan and Grosvenor Estates) and charities all of whom has substantial interests in freehold property portfolios.

In essence, the Claimants argued that measures within the 2024 Act relating to the amounts payable by leaseholders to freeholders in the context of enfranchisement including: (1) a cap on the amount of rent payable under a lease when arriving at the landlord’s term value; (2) an assumption that no marriage or hope value will be payable to the landlord; and (3) the absence of any liability on the enfranchising leaseholder to pay the landlord’s non-litigation costs of enfranchisement involved a disproportionate interference with their A1P1 rights.

The Divisional Court rejected those arguments and concluded that the measures under challenge, whether considered individually or cumulatively, are compatible with A1P1.

A copy of the decision is available here.

Hugh Flanagan and Charles Streeten acted for the successful Defendant, the Secretary of State for Housing Communities and Local Government instructed by the Government Legal Department.