Ellodie Gibbons > Tanfield Chambers > London, England > Lawyer Profile
Tanfield Chambers Offices
2-5 WARWICK COURT
- Go to...
Property litigation (including property-related professional negligence). Particular expertise in leasehold enfranchisement, right to manage, rights of first refusal and service and administration charges. Significant cases include:
Portman Estate Nominees Ltd v Starlight Headlease Ltd  UKUT 0467 (LC) – apportionment – appurtenances – enfranchisement
Greenpine Investment Holding Ltd v Howard de Walden Estates Ltd  EWHC 1923 (Ch) – Leasehold Enfranchisement
Moorjani v Durban Estates Ltd  EWCA Civ 1252 – Common parts – Disrepair – Landlords’ duties – Loss of amenity – Measure of damages – Repair covenants
Merie Bin Mahfouz Co (UK) Ltd v Barrie House (Freehold) Ltd  UKUT 390 – Leasehold enfranchisement – collective enfranchisement – leasebacks under Schedule 9 to the Leasehold Reform
Plotnek v Govan  UKUT 332 (LC) – Enfranchisement – house – purchase price – provision in lease for rent reviews
London Borough Camden v The Leaseholders of 4767 Residential Properties, Unreported, 2014, First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Service charges
Money v Cadogan Holdings Ltd  UKUT 0211 (LC) Leasehold enfranchisement – collective enfranchisement under the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993
Westmacott v Ackerman  UKUT 415 (LC) Houses converted to flats – Leasehold Reform Act 1967 s9(1A)
Avon Castle Limited v C.R Vending & Electronics Limited, Unreported, 2012, LVT Rights offered under s.1(4) of the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993
Barrie House Freehold Ltd & Ors v. Merie Bin Mahfouz Company (UK) Ltd EWHC 353 (Ch)
Palley v. London Borough Camden  UKUT 469 (LC) Service charges – liability
Richard Ayres & Ors v. Jonathan Roberts & Anor CC (Central London) (Judge Peter Cowell)  L.&T.R 1 The effect of a failure to comply with a completion notice served under paragraph 8 of Schedule 2 to the Leasehold Reform (Collective Enfranchisement and Lease Renewal) Regulations 1993
Calladine-Smith v. Saveorder Ltd  EWHC 2501 (Ch) The interpretation of section 7 of the Interpretation Act 1978 and the application of that section to the service of notices under the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993
Sherwood Hall (East End Road) Management Company Limited v Magnolia Tree Limited  UKUT 158 LC Collective enfranchisement –
Halahmy v The Westminister Roman Catholic Diocese Trust LON/CIOAC/OLR/2007/1439, LVT
Qualified 1999; Inner Temple. Contributor to ‘Service Charges and Management’ (Sweet and Maxwell, 1st , 2nd and 3rd editions), co-author of ‘Leasehold Enfranchisement Explained’ (RICS Publishing). Winner: Barrister of the Year – Enfranchisement Awards 2009.
Property Bar Association; Chancery Bar Association; Association of Leasehold Enfranchisement Practitioners.
Lancaster Girls’ Grammar School; Emmanuel College, Cambridge (1997 BA (Cantab)).
Dancing, skiing, travelling.
Lawyer Rankings(Leading Juniors) Ranked: Tier 3
Ellodie Gibbons – Tanfield Chambers ‘ Great technical ability but down to earth, and able to explain issues easily to lay clients. She also has great client inter-personal skills, is able to cut straight through to the issues and is commercial too. ’
Tanfield Chambers is a focused property set with strong expertise across residential landlord and tenant work, real property, and commercial real estate disputes, alongside specialist areas such as party walls. Head of chambers Philip Rainey QC and Ellodie Gibbons represented the landlord in Sequent Nominees Ltd (Formerly Rotrust Nominees Ltd) v Hautford Ltd before the Supreme Court, securing a ruling preventing a tenant from obtaining planning permission without the landlord’s permission. Another major case for Rainey QC was the successful in the Court of Appeal in enfranchisement case LM Homes v Queen Court Freehold Company Ltd, which also featured Carl Fain on the counsel team for the tenants. Kerry Bretherton QC is representing the hotel in Poste Hotels v Cousins, a High Court case relating to rights of way, arguing that the hotel owner had acquired by prescription a right of way over the cul-de-sac giving access to the laundry, which had been repeatedly blocked by the opponent’s car, which both parties have sought permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal. Christopher Heather QC continues to represent the restaurant chain in the Performance Retail (General Partner) Ltd v Wagamama Ltd case relating to interpretations of a lease agreement.