Skip to main content
CLOSE

Charities

Close

Corporate and Commercial

Close

Employment and Immigration

Close

Fraud and Investigations

Close

Individuals

Close

Litigation

Close

Planning, Infrastructure and Regeneration

Close

Public Law

Close

Real Estate

Close

Restructuring and Insolvency

Close

Energy

Close

Entrepreneurs

Close

Private Wealth

Close

Real Estate

Close

Tech and Innovation

Close

Transport and Infrastructure

Close
Home / News and Insights / Press / John Stephenson comments on Mundy v The Trustees of the Sloane Stanley Estate

Leases and Valuation

A landmark decision from the Court of Appeal in the case of Mundy v The Trustees of the Sloane Stanley Estate has just been handed down in relation to the valuation method for valuing statutory freehold and lease extension claims.

Background

This long running case involves a flat in Chelsea with a residue of 23 years left to run on the lease. The issue that arose in the case was how to calculate the premium for a lease extension in cases where the lease has less than 80 years unexpired. This is done in part by calculating the value of the tenant’s interest in the flat with the present lease (but excluding statutory rights to extend) as a percentage of the freehold interest (‘relativity’).

Calculating relativity and the effect of excluding statutory rights is complex and involves an assessment of comparable market sales of flats. The assessment has hitherto been mainly done by reference to so called ‘relativity graphs’ the most frequently quoted of which was produced by surveyors, Gerald Eve, over 20 years ago on instructions from the Grosvenor Estate. In the absence of other credible methods to assess relativity, the Gerald Eve graph has been adopted by surveyors and Tribunals alike as the industry standard but leaseholders have long felt that it no longer represents a fair way to assess relativity.

In 2016, Mr Mundy offered in the Upper Tribunal an alternative model to calculate relativity known as hedonic regression which involved analysis of statistical data from nearly 8,000 open market transactions of houses and flats between 1987 and 1991 with adjustment for length of lease. His attempt failed even though the Tribunal accepted that relativities for leases have changed over the years. Mr Mundy then appealed to the Court of Appeal but the court has now again rejected the hedonic regression model in its judgment.

Commenting upon the outcome of the appeal, John Stephenson, head of leasehold enfranchisement at Bircham Dyson Bell, whose firm represented the appellant, said that

‘For the moment it appears that the Gerald Eve graph will remain in use until a more accurate method of valuation is tested in the Tribunal or the Government intercedes with an amendment to the legislation. Unless and until this happens leaseholders will have to pay a higher price than some of them feel they should for extending their leases or buying their freeholds. In London alone, this means nearly 500,000 flats and houses with leases under 80 years left to run and needing to extend in the near future.’

Related Articles

Our Offices

London
One Bartholomew Close
London
EC1A 7BL

Cambridge
50/60 Station Road
Cambridge
CB1 2JH

Reading
The Anchorage, 34 Bridge Street
Reading RG1 2LU

Southampton
4 Grosvenor Square
Southampton SO15 2BE

 

Reading
The Anchorage, 34 Bridge Street
Reading RG1 2LU

Southampton
4 Grosvenor Square
Southampton SO15 2BE

  • Lexcel
  • CYBER ESSENTIALS PLUS

© BDB Pitmans 2024. One Bartholomew Close, London EC1A 7BL - T +44 (0)345 222 9222

Our Services

Charities chevron
Corporate and Commercial chevron
Employment and Immigration chevron
Fraud and Investigations chevron
Individuals chevron
Litigation chevron
Planning, Infrastructure and Regeneration chevron
Public Law chevron
Real Estate chevron
Restructuring and Insolvency chevron

Sectors and Groups

Private Wealth chevron
Real Estate chevron
Transport and Infrastructure chevron