Why is hedonistic regression analysis stirring the enfranchisement world?

During the last year there have been three notable cases that have significantly impacted the enfranchisement profession. The decisions known as 61 Queens Gate, Dolphin Square and 47 Phillimore Gardens are important for leading enfranchisement surveyors to note.

These cases formed the backbone of our recent Annual Enfranchisement seminar, brief details of which can be found below:

61 Queens Gate
Solicitor and enfranchisement specialist, Amy Jackson, discussed this case which saw Forsters act for the freeholder who appealed the Tribunal's decision on a collective enfranchisement claim. Although permission was initially refused, it was subsequently granted after a successful judicial review. The appeal concerned the terms of three proposed leasebacks and the freeholder's ability to deal with the freehold before completion of a collective claim. The Tribunal concluded that the freeholder was entitled to grant 999 year leases of the flats involved up to the date of completion provided that it did not breach the terms of the enfranchisement legislation in doing so.

Dolphin Square
Partner, and head of residential property Lucy Barber talked though the complex decision in Dolphin Square (Westbrook Dolphin Square Ltd v Friends Life Ltd [2014] EWHC 2433 (Ch) ). This case involved a number of issues but most importantly clarifies the company structure required on a collective claim and also what qualifies as commercial or residential space when measuring the relative areas of the building.

47 Phillimore Gardens
Gary Cowan of Falcon Chambers was invited as a guest speaker. Gary was instructed by Natasha Rees, partner and head of property litigation at Forsters in the recent appeal known as 47 Phillimore Gardens (Latifa Kosta v the Trustees of the Phillimore Estate 2014 [UK UT0319 LC). The appeal concerned the issue of relativity. It has caused a bit of a stir in the enfranchisement world because the tenant was seeking to rely on a new statistical model introduced by an economist Dr Bracke. The new model, which is based on hedonic regression analysis of historical sales data, results in a higher relativity than the more traditional graphs. A higher relativity results in a lower premium which obviously suited the tenant. Forsters managed to persuade the Tribunal not to depart from the traditional method adopted by the landlord.