Burrell and others v Helical (Bramshott Place) Limited

The High Court has granted summary judgment against the Claimants on a novel claim brought under the Consumer Credit Act 1974. The Claimants, current and former residents at a retirement village, alleged that the terms of long leases granted by their landlord concerning the payment of assignment fees on the transfer of a lease, and the retention of sums  on the termination of a lease, made provision for “credit” within the meaning of the Act. The terms were alleged to be unenforceable because the leases did not comply with various provisions of the Act relating to credit agreements.

The High Court considered the test to be applied in determining whether an agreement provides for credit, namely whether there is a deferment of an obligation to pay to a date later than it would otherwise have arisen under the express or implied terms of a contract. It held that test required the Court to focus on the nature of the contractual obligations arising under the terms alleged to provide for credit rather than the economic effect of those provisions. In the case before it, the Court could safely conclude that the Claimants had no real prospect of successfully arguing at trial that, on their true construction, the terms of the leases provided for credit.

The full judgment can be read here: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2015/3727.html

Ian Mill QC and Hanif Mussa acted for the successful Defendant.