header-logo header-logo

NLJ this week: Clarity on cladding

24 October 2025
Issue: 8136 / Categories: Legal News , Landlord&tenant , Housing , Construction , Health & safety
printer mail-detail
233321
In this week's NLJ, Bhavini Patel of Howard Kennedy LLP reports on Almacantar v De Valk [2025], a landmark Upper Tribunal ruling extending protection for leaseholders under the Building Safety Act 2022

The tribunal decided that ‘cladding remediation’ covers any unsafe outer-wall cladding, regardless of when installed or whether it stems from a ‘relevant defect’, meaning works over 30 years old may still qualify. The case—concerning London’s Centre Point House—ensures leaseholders cannot be billed for removing unsafe materials, affirming Michael Gove’s pledge that residents should not bear remediation costs.

The tribunal rejected the landlord’s narrow interpretation and confirmed that ‘unsafe’ need not mean only fire risk. Patel calls the ruling a major clarification of Parliament’s intent to protect homeowners and a reminder that statutory wording must be read literally, not limited by implication.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll