Judgment Date: 24 Feb 2010
This case raised issues as to jurisdiction and discretion under s.48 of the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993. The landlord asserted that the tenant’s application under s.48 had been made too soon and that, no later application having been made, the tenant’s claim was deemed to have been withdrawn. In the alternative, the landlord sought an order under s.48(4) that the tenant’s claim should be deemed to have been withdrawn. The tenant disagreed, and various several further arguments in response, including an argument that the application was, in any event, made at the appropriate time.