The law is replete with cases in which two parties to an agreement differ in their interpretations of what they had agreed. Such disagreements can have profound implications for landlords as there are many legal rights attaching to the occupation of property.

A recent case illustrates the point. A social landlord wished to make sure that a residential home for the elderly, which was empty, was protected from occupation by squatters or from damage.

In a decision of great importance to landlords of student accommodation, a tribunal has found that bedsits with communal facilities are not separate dwellings. The ruling meant that the tribunal had no power to consider an attempt by a group of students to have their service charges fixed by law.

The case concerned an old fire station that had been converted into student digs. It contained 96 bedsits, most of which had en suite shower rooms.

When it comes to issuing service charge demands, landlords must stick to the letter of leases or risk recovering nothing at all – even if that results in tenants receiving an unwarranted windfall. The Court of Appeal made that point in relieving a residential tenant of liability to pay service charges over a four-year period.

Entering into property deals without legal advice is like trying to run before you can walk and can lead to untold heartache and financial loss. That was certainly so in the case of a man who invested a six-figure sum in refurbishing a country cottage and barn for the holiday letting market, although he had no long-term security of tenure.

Landlords are generally not entitled to unreasonably withhold consent to assignment of leases – but what if some of the reasons given for such a refusal are good, and others bad? The Court of Appeal tackled that issue in a case of importance to property professionals.