Permission to Appeal Refused by the Supreme Court

On 30 September 2025, the Supreme Court (Lord Reed PSP, Lord Burrows and Lord Stephens JJSC), refused an application by Plymouth Community Homes for permission to appeal the Court of Appeal’s decision in Plymouth Community Homes v Crisplane [2025] EWCA Civ 346 [2025] 4 W.L.R. 41. Rawdon Crozier had successfully represented Crisplane Limited in securing permission to appeal from the First-tier Tribunal, as appellant in the Upper Tribunal and as respondent in the Court of Appeal. The decision brings to an end over 5 years of litigation for Crisplane and has important consequences for Right-to-Buy leaseholders in Plymouth and potentially beyond since the form of Right-to-Buy lease involved is believed to have been in widespread use (see previous news items [insert links]) The case concerned whether the  Respondent, as lessee, was liable to contribute by way of service charge to the costs incurred by the Appellant, as lessor, in repairing the roofs of two properties in Plymouth? The primary point in issue was the interrelation between statutorily implied covenants in Right-to-Buy leases under Paragraph 14 of Schedule 6 to Housing Act 1985 and the express terms of the lease. Rawdon advises on all types of lease interpretation and appeared in the seminal case of Arnold v Britton [2015] UKSC 36.

Rawdon has a busy civil practice, with specialist areas that include property and contractual matters. If you wish to discuss anything in this article or you want to instruct Rawdon you can contact the Civil Clerks on civilclerks@kbgchambers.co.uk