The Bill
The Bill
The Bill was introduced in the House of Commons on 27 November 2023. The Bill’s Explanatory Notes referred in its “overview section” to making “long-term changes to home ownership for millions of leaseholders”.
Also on 27 November 2023, the Government published a response to consultation on “Reforming the leasehold and commonhold systems in England and Wales” (the “Commonhold Response”). This contained references to broadening “access to the right to manage and enfranchisement so more leaseholders can manage and own their homes” and delivering “a better deal for leaseholders as consumers while taking into account the legitimate rights of freeholders.” However, the Government’s objective was also defined in wider terms: “the Government’s programme aims primarily to improve the leasehold system for leaseholders” and that the object was “improving access to enfranchisement” and promoting “transparency and fairness in the residential leasehold sector.” The only discussion of a distinction between different types of leaseholder came in question 5, on the issue of possible exemptions from the non-residential limit for collective enfranchisement, which states “we agree with the Law Commission that these rights should be available to all residential leaseholders and that drawing a distinction between commercial investors and residential leaseholder would be neither workable nor desirable” ([2.39]). Reference was made to difficulties of definition, additional complexity and the impact on other leaseholders in the collective enfranchisement context, including the risk of disenfranchising leaseholders.
The IA was published on 11 December 2023, at the time of the Second Reading in the House of Commons. The Parties have identified key figures, statistics and estimates in the IA in Agreed Statement F – ‘Key Statistics on Effects of the Legislation’.
The Bill published in December 2023 also contained a statement under s.19(1)(a) of the HRA Act 1998 that the provisions of the Bill were compatible with the ECHR.
In January 2024, in response to a Government consultation on restricting ground rent for existing leases (the “CMA 2024 Response”), the CMA highlighted a number of concerns with ground rent practices at that time, including ground rents which increased in line with RPI and/or doubled periodically ([32]-[36]). The CMA was not persuaded that the extent of an obligation to pay ground rent was reflected in the price for the property and saw no persuasive evidence that the leaseholder received anything in return ([42]-[43]).
The Committee stage in the House of Commons took place across ten sittings over five days in January 2024.
- Heading
- Lord Justice Holgate and Mr Justice Foxton This judgment is set out under the following headings
- The parties
- The issues raised by the parties
- The legislative history
- The LFRA 2024
- Article 1 of the First Protocol – the legal principles The approach of UK courts to the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights
- The structure of A1P1
- James v United Kingdom
- Strasbourg jurisprudence after James
- Are the effects of the wasting asset problem priced into the premia for residential leaseholds?
- Proportionality in domestic law – general principles
- Assessing the aims of a measure and its justification
- The width of the margin of appreciation
- General rules or bright lines
- Less intrusive measures
- The ab ante principle
- Indirect discrimination
- The requirement for compensation to be reasonably related to the value of the property taken
- The concept of market value
- The evolution of the measures under challenge
- The Law Commission embarks on a further leasehold reform project
- Contributions from Government and Parliament
- The Law Commission Consultation Paper No.238
- Further Government and Parliamentary activity
- The Law Commission Valuation Report (No.387)
- CMA involvement
- The Law Commission Enfranchisement Report (No.392)
- The Government moves towards legislation
- The Impact Assessment
- The Bill
- The ECHR Memorandum
- Engagement by the claimants in the reform process
- After the LFRA 2024 was enacted
- Estimates of the impact of the measures The material before the court
- The challenge to the IA and Addendum IA
- The aims of the measures The rival cases as to the objects of the LFRA 2024
- The legislation
- Hansard
- The statutory interventions prior to the LFRA 2024
- The material from 2016 to the enactment of the LFRA 2024
- Conclusions as to objects
- Are the measures rationally connected with the identified objects?
- The Ground Rent Cap
- The background
- Whether the objects which the Ground Rent Cap was intended to achieve could have been achieved by a less intrusive measure
- The “fair balance” assessment
- Conclusion
- The Marriage Value Reform
- Marriage value and the problem of the tenant’s lease as a wasting asset
- Consideration of marriage value in documents leading to the LFRA 2024
- Aims
- The claimants’ arguments on the justification for the Marriage Value Reform
- Whether the objects which the Marriage Value Reform was intended to achieve could have been achieved by a less intrusive measure
- The “fair balance” assessment
- The submissions of John Lyon’s Charity on the Marriage Value Reform
- Conclusion
- The Costs Recovery Reform
- Aims and justification
- Fair balance assessment
- Conclusion
- The cumulative effect of the measures
- Whether the non-exclusion of charities from the measures violates A1P1? Introduction
- Consideration of the effect of enfranchisement reform on charities prior to the enactment of the LFRA 2024
- The effect on landlords with charitable status
- The case for the Portal Trust Introduction
- The pre-legislative and legislative process
- The objects of the LFRA 2024
- Conclusions
![[2025] EWHC 2751 (Admin)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_fi51A75.png)