Fleur Neale

Wall_Fleur_new.jpg
 
 

Fleur Neale

Legal Director, Property Litigation & Enfranchisement

+44 (0)20 7636 4422
Email Fleur
Download vCard

As a key member of Wallace’s renowned Leasehold Enfranchisement team, Fleur brings over a decade’s experience in residential property litigation. She is a lynchpin member of our dedicated team advising one of London’s largest private landlords, and also represents individual landlords, tenants and groups of tenants.

Fleur has conducted matters at the Property Chamber, Lands Tribunal and County & High Courts and has been involved in a number of landmark cases. She advises on leasehold enfranchisement and general residential property litigation matters, from applications for the grant of new leases or the acquisition of freehold titles under the relevant Reform Acts, to applications to vary leases or enforce lease covenants. Fleur has become a go-to legal talent in the field.

She is recommended by the Legal 500 which describes her as “brilliant”.

 

Work Highlights

  • City & Country Properties v Plowden Investments Limited [2007] L & TR – Landmark case which determined the requirements for a company to execute a Notice of Claim pursuant to the provisions of Section 99 of the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993.

  • Brickfield Properties Limited (Freshwater Group of Companies) v Botten [2013] UKUT 0133 (LC) – Landmark case which confirmed that where a lease is varied pursuant to section 38 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987, the effective date of variation can pre-date the decision ordering variation.

  • Deritend Investments (Birkdale) Limited v Treskonova – 5 Mansard Manor [2020] UKUT 0164 (LC) – Landmark case which successfully appealed a decision of the Property Chamber and obtained an influential Upper Tribunal decision concerning the determination of relativity (the relative value of the property held on an existing long lease compared to its freehold value) for new lease claims under the 1993 Act. The decision is of significant importance for the calculation of premiums payable and is now regularly relied upon and referred to by enfranchisement professionals and the Upper Tribunal.

  • 19-25 Pendennis Road & 45-54 Dover Crescent RTM Company Limited v Assethold Limited - 19-25 Pendennis Road & 45-54 Dover Crescent [2022] CAM/00KB/LRM/2021/0003 & LC-2022-529 – Where a rare Order for costs was successfully obtained against the Landlord pursuant to the provisions of Rule 13 of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rules 2013 for acting unreasonably by maintaining ‘spurious’ objections to a Right to Manage Claim Notice which lacked basis in fact. The Decision was upheld by the Upper Tribunal who dismissed the Landlord’s Application seeking permission to Appeal.

 
 

Qualifications

Qualified: 1999 (Australia)/2004 (UK)
Accolades: Recommended by the Legal 500

N, F, PLE, Legal DirectorWilliam Burtonn