Residential Service Charges for Commercial Property Lawyers

  • 1 ratings, 48 users enrolled

Course Overview

In Oakfern v Ruddy [2006] EWCA Civ the court of appeal decided that the consultation requirements under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 apply to mixed-use buildings. Where there is a head lease and there are flats held on subleases, who does the freeholder have to consult?  Does it include the head tenant and or the flat leaseholders?   Has the decision of the Supreme Court in Daejan v Benson [2013] simplified any of the issues?

This is the subject of this lecture by Professor James Driscoll.  

During this webinar Professor James Driscoll. will consider an almost a carbon copy of Oakfern v Ruddy in which the client is thinking of buying a freehold investment, and underneath that is a head lease (commercial & residential) and then about 25 individual flat tenants beneath that. Our client is horrified at the idea of having to consult the head tenant on effectively every item of service charge expenditure - almost everything will be over the £250/£100 threshold. 

What are the requirements?

  • Watch 1 hour recorded webinar
  • This course provides one CPD point

Learning Outcomes

  • This course will consider what happens in practice? Does the head tenant then have to re-consult with the flat tenants if their individual share will be over the threshold? Presumably the flat tenants can only challenge the freeholder (as per Oakfern) if their share is over the £250?

What is the target audience?

  • Practitioners



About Instructor - James Driscoll

Professor James Driscoll is a solicitor and a writer who for 20 years was a consultant with Trowers & Hamlins. James is a prolific author of property and housing law books.  He is a regular contributor to the Estates Gazette, the New Law Journal and other journals.  James is a Judge, First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) and an accredited mediator.

Course Curriculum

recorded webinars

  • Webinar


  • Slides
    20 Page


  • Price
  • £ 60