Landmark case won

The council has won a landmark case at the Royal Courts of Justice which centred on complex property issues, but drew on Charles Dickens’ Bleak House to be resolved. The council’s ‘novel’ case means it will now take its place in the history books as case law.

The case centred around the property Porterslea, which sits in the middle of Shenley Park, near Radlett. Its occupant wanted to acquire the freehold of the house and the 1.4 acres of land surrounding it and the Central London County Court had previously agreed.

However the council succeeded in its subsequent appeal to the Court of Appeal against this decision, was awarded its costs and made case law in the process.

Sajida Bijle, the council’s Director of Resources, welcomed the court’s decision. She said: “This was a complex case which has been carefully considered and I am glad the courts found in our favour. The status of a property, the land that adjoins it or surrounds it were intrinsic parts of the arguments put forward and it was that, along with housing law, which the judges had to consider.”

Shenley Park is an area of 46.8 acres which was formerly the site of a hospital built in the 1930s. The house on the site, known as Porterslea, was occupied by staff employed at the hospital but in the 1990s the hospital was closed, parts of its grounds were sold for housing development and the remainder was retained as a rural park for public recreational purposes, called Shenley Park, which Hertsmere Borough Council is the freehold owner of. The land is also home to the famous Shenley Cricket Ground. 

In 1993, Hertsmere leased Shenley Park to Shenley Park Trust, a charity, for a term of 150 years and in 1995, the Trust granted a 125 year lease of Porterslea and its grounds to the current occupants. The grounds are bounded by the remainder of Shenley Park.

When the lease was granted by the Trust it was agreed that it would not carry any right to buy the freehold, but the occupants argued that a change in housing law gave them the right to do so – to acquire the freehold of the house and its gardens and this argument found favour with Judge Dight.

However, represented by Joanne Wicks QC, Hertsmere persuaded the Court of Appeal that the Judge’s approach to the interpretation of the legislation produced ‘absurd results which could never have been intended by Parliament.’ The case hinged on the 'potentially flexible' meaning of the word 'adjoining' and Lord Justice Rimer demonstrated that 'adjoining' does not have to mean touching. The appeal court judge said: "...that a user of the word 'adjoining' may not necessarily be using it as meaning 'touching'." He declared: ‘Chapter 32 of Bleak House concludes with the description of Krook’s demise in his Rag and Bottle Warehouse by the phenomenon of spontaneous combustion. Chapter 33 describes the inquest, held at the Sol’s Arms, ‘a well-conducted tavern, immediately adjoining the premises in question [the warehouse], on the west side, and licensed to a highly respectable landlord, Mr James George Bogsby.’ Dickens' words neatly illustrate the point that a user of the word ‘adjoining’ may not necessarily be using it as meaning ‘touching’.’

The court allowed the appeal and ordered the occupants to pay all of the council’s costs of around £22,000. While the occupants can continue to enjoy their rights as leaseholder, the council retains ultimate ownership of Porterslea, to the benefit of local residents.

Mrs Bijle added: “This means that the land on which the property sits will be protected for generations to come. This unusual case will be now used as case law in similar instances, which is particularly gratifying where public money and assets are at stake.”

The appeal was considered on 4 October, with the judgment being made on 27 October before Lord Justice Longmore, Lord Justice Rimer and Mr Justice Warren.

Lord Justice Rimer upheld the appeal and ruled in favour of the council. He dismissed the argument that, under leasehold enfranchisement laws, for land to be designed ‘adjoining’, it needed to be touching the building rather than just the garden surrounding it.

 The full judgment from the court is available on request. Please contact us on 020 8207 7417.