Last edited 17 Dec 2020

Main author

Martinc Website

Smith & Dennis v Jafton Properties

This case has far-reaching implications for commercial tenants of former residential buildings seeking to enfranchise their leasehold interests. The decision in the case of Smith & Dennis v Jafton Properties Limited follows that of the Supreme Court in Day v Hosebay.

That case held that a building used solely for commercial purposes was not a "dwelling" and the tenant, therefore, had no rights of enfranchisement.

In Smith & Dennis v Jafton Properties Limited the Court considered the definition of a "flat" under the Leasehold Reform Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 and ruled that even if premises are considered to be a flat, the use to which a flat is put must be considered as well in determining whether or not enfranchisement rights exist. In this case the Judge ruled that as the flats were solely used for commercial purposes, the tenants did not have the right to buy the freehold.

The judgement means that, in addition to considering whether premises are a "flat" under the act, the actual current use and nature of occupation are also relevant in considering enfranchisement rights.

This article was created by by:--Martinc 12:40, 2 July 2013 (BST)

[edit] Related articles on Designing Buildings Wiki

Designing Buildings Anywhere

Get the Firefox add-on to access 20,000 definitions direct from any website

Find out more Accept cookies and
don't show me this again