Featured documents
R (Greyhound Board of Great Britain Ltd) v Welsh Ministers [2026] EWHC 670 (Admin) What are the practical implications of this case? The ruling reinforces the constitutional divide between the courts and the legislature. It explains that the scheme and framework of the Government of Wales Act 2006 (GWA 2006) embody that separation of powers, and that any judicial attempt to recognise and enforce a common law obligation on Welsh Ministers to consult prior to introducing legislation in the Senedd would trespass upon that boundary. This is not a departure from established principle; case law has already upheld comparable rules for lawmakers in Scotland and at Westminster. However, this is the first express confirmation of the position for Welsh lawmakers, and the first time this dimension of the GWA 2006 has been analysed in such depth. The court examined earlier
The solution arrived through the United Nations Compensation Commission (UNCC), a quasi‑judicial body handling mass claims, created under UN Security Council Resolution 687. By addressing environmental harm—most notably via its ‘F4’ claim class—the UNCC set a seminal benchmark shaping how international law and contemporary arbitral panels allocate financial responsibility for wartime ecological devastation. With present-day wars in areas such as Eastern Europe and the Middle East bringing dam breaches, strikes on chemical facilities, and the burning of farmland, the UNCC’s legacy endures as an essential reference point for states, global investors, and companies engaged in post‑conflict arbitration. The F4 claims: Quantifying the unquantifiable Prior to the 1990s, mechanisms in international law for war reparations overwhelmingly favoured property loss, foregone earnings, and bodily injury. The natural world was commonly treated as a mute, non-compensable victim of armed hostilities...
Understanding the farming business as a business Many farms still use long-standing structures that arose by habit, not strategy. Sole traders, informal partnerships and outdated partnership deeds are common. While once effective, such setups can cause major issues around succession, tax planning and involving the next generation. A corporate team can take a fresh, business-led view of the farm, asking: Who owns the land and other critical assets? Who manages daily operations? Who carries the risk and who enjoys the return? What is the enduring plan for succession? From this review, the team can confirm whether the current setup is fit for purpose or if an alternative — for example an updated partnership agreement, a company, a limited liability partnership, or a blended model — would better meet the family’s aims. Tax efficiency through joined-up advice Tax sits at the centre of most
Most recent News
In this issue: Key developments and horizon scanning Disputes and remedies Electronic communications Service charges Residential tenancies Easements and covenants Enforcing security and property insolvency Rent and rates Neighbour and party wall disputes Property disputes in Scotland Additional Property Disputes updates Lex Talk® Property Disputes: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Latest Q& As Key developments and horizon scanning Law Commission publishes scoping report on agricultural law in Wales The Law Commission has released a scoping report on agricultural law in Wales, finding that the current patchwork of rules could be refreshed, streamlined and made easier to navigate via a prospective bilingual code. Surveying around 150 measures drawn from the Senedd, the UK Parliament, EU-derived...
On Tower UK Ltd v AP Wireless II ( UK) Ltd [2026] EWCA Civ 43 What are the practical implications of this case? This ruling carries immediate and far-reaching importance for advisers dealing with the Code. The Court of Appeal has confirmed that merely holding the benefit of a Code agreement is enough to trigger Part 5 renewal rights, delivering long overdue clarity in a field that had produced transactional and procedural risk. For transactional practitioners, the judgment endorses familiar market arrangements, including assignments, portfolio transfers and the deployment of special purpose vehicles ( SPVs). Operators and infrastructure investors can pursue acquisitions, internal reorganisations and asset transfers without risking the loss of statutory renewal protection. Even so, due diligence should now concentrate on tracing the benefit of Code rights rather than depending solely on the identity of the formal contracting party. For...
The CPRC no longer circulates the supporting papers with its minutes, so this News Analysis is not accompanied by documents explaining the matters discussed. A copy of the minutes is available here: Minutes of the CPR Committee meeting... Welcome, apologies and introductory remarks (item 1) The Chair opened by welcoming attendees, with particular thanks to the Civil Justice Council ( CJC) observer, Mr John Cuss, joining as the new CJC link member. The minutes of the 7 November 2025 meeting (see News Analysis: Minutes of the CPR Committee meeting—7 November 2025) were approved, subject to minor changes. The action log was noted: regarding the court’s power to order disclosure from a non-party, no further consultation is required and the intention is to include this in the next Civil Procedure Rules ( CPR) updates, ie April 2026. On the initial report concerning arbitral awards, it was...
In this issue: Key developments and horizon scanning Residential tenancies Electronic communications Service charges Easements and covenants Disputes and remedies Enforcing security and property insolvency Property disputes in Scotland Additional Property Disputes updates Lex Talk® Property Disputes: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Key developments and horizon scanning Updates on draft Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Bill The Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Bill was unveiled on 27 January 2026. Its core aim is to dismantle the feudal leasehold regime by revitalising and expanding commonhold, while prohibiting leasehold tenure for most newly built flats. For further insight, see: News Analysis: Draft Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Bill—the demise of the long leasehold flat, abolition of residential ground rent and new ways for...
A copy of the minutes can be found here: Minutes of the Online Procedure Rule Committee Welcome, apologies and introductory remarks (item 1) No apologies were submitted. The record of the last meeting (20 October 2025) was confirmed. Open meeting feedback (item 2) The committee received an update on comments from the open meeting. Ten submissions arrived and, in general, the sentiment was favourable, with calls for earlier sharing of meeting particulars and access to papers. Respondents also observed contrasts between OPRC and CPRC minutes, and the committee noted that OPRC conversations are adopting a different style at this early phase of rule development. Consultation responses (item 3) The committee resolved to focus first on the draft Inclusion Framework via three workstreams ( Inclusion, Technology and Communication). The Inclusion stream will craft options for a self-certification model; the Technology stream will concentrate on a...
What are the practical implications of this case? The decision carries clear real-world importance for advisers on residential service charges, building safety works and the construction of leases. The Court of Appeal made plain that service charge liability is narrowly bounded by the lease wording, even if works are undertaken for safety reasons and even where the expenditure is significant. Widely framed repair, maintenance or safety clauses will not, without more, transfer responsibility for rectifying inherent, pre-existing structural defects to leaseholders unless the lease clearly allocates that risk. For those acting for landlords and local authorities, the ruling exposes the limits of leaning on general or ‘sweeper’ provisions to recover the costs of major structural remediation, particularly in older buildings erected using methods now discredited. It underscores the need for early, meticulous lease review before commencing large-scale works and may oblige advisers to...
In this issue: Key developments and horizon scanning Residential tenancies Trespass and adverse possession Rent and rates Disputes and remedies Service charges Repairing obligations and dilapidations Electronic communications Easements and covenants Additional Property Disputes updates Lex Talk®Property Disputes: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Latest Q& As Key developments and horizon scanning BPF and Law Commission comment on draft Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Bill The British Property Federation ( BPF) has replied to the draft Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Bill, warning that mooted ground rent caps may undermine investments held by pension schemes and other institutional backers. It argued that those investors, who acted in good faith to meet pension promises, ought to receive appropriate...
Conway v Conway and another [2025] EWHC 33314 ( Ch) What was the background? In March 2019, the parties reached a verbal understanding for the respondents to purchase the appellant’s barn for £150,000 sterling. Solicitors were engaged to formalise the transfer, but talks collapsed over a contentious provision—whether the appellant retained a call option to re-purchase the barn from the respondents. It was accepted by both sides that the price was never paid to the appellant, and that the respondents had gone into occupation and undertaken substantial renovation and refurbishment works. Following the collapse of negotiations, the appellant sought declaratory relief that the respondents held no proprietary interest in the barn and also an injunction restraining further access. The respondents, relying solely and entirely on proprietary estoppel, issued a counterclaim seeking an order compelling transfer of the barn to them on the terms of the...
In this issue: Key developments and horizon scanning Repairing obligations and dilapidations Service charges Disputes and remedies Rent and rates Property disputes in Scotland Additional Property Disputes updates Lex Talk® Property Disputes: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Latest Q& As Key developments and horizon scanning MHCLG publishes draft Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Bill and accompanying consultation on banning leasehold flats The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government ( MHCLG) issued a draft Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Bill on 27 January 2026 for pre-legislative scrutiny. The draft sets out plans to modernise the commonhold regime, allowing current leaseholders to convert their buildings to commonhold with fewer hurdles, and to prohibit leasehold for most new flats. These proposals follow the Law...
Lillystone v Bradgate Education Partnership [2025] EWHC 3341 ( KB) What are the practical implications of this case? Accidents caused by balls escaping play ( Bolton v Stone [1951] AC 850) are not unusual. Incidents involving people climbing fences ( Phillips v South East Education and Library Board [2015] NIQB 91; Wray v Derry City and Strabane District Council [2020] NIQB 39) also arise. More broadly, the decision reinforces that OLA 1957, s 1(1) limits the duty of care owed by owners/occupiers to dangers stemming from the state of the premises and to acts or omissions in relation to that state. Relying on Tomlinson v Congleton Borough Council [2004] 1 AC 46, the appeal court drew a distinction between hazards attributable to the condition of the premises where what was done, or not done, formed part of that...
In this issue: Residential tenancies Repair duties and dilapidations Rent and rates Service charges Disputes and remedies Enforcing security and property insolvency Enfranchisement and right to manage Property Disputes in Scotland Further Property Disputes updates Lex Talk® Property Disputes: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Residential tenancies Required contents of written statement of terms and information sheet required under Renters’ Rights Act 2025 published The government has released draft regulations detailing what must appear in the written statement of terms and the information sheets mandated by section 12 of the Renters’ Rights Act 2026 ( RRA 2025). The Assured Tenancies ( Private Rented Sector) ( Written Statement of Terms etc. and Information Sheet) ( England) Regulations 2026 specifies the particulars to be provided for assured tenancies from 1 May 2026. In Wales, the Renters’ Rights Act 2025 ( Commencement) ( Wales) Order 2026 SI 2026/6 brings selected...
In this issue: Key developments and horizon scanning Residential tenancies Repairing obligations and dilapidations Rent and rates Disputes and remedies Enforcing security and property insolvency Property disputes in Scotland Additional Property Disputes updates Lex Talk® Property Disputes: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Key developments and horizon scanning Property and Property Disputes—key developments in 2025 and horizon scanning for 2026. This News Analysis offers an overview of major developments across Property and Property Disputes in England & Wales during 2025 and signals what lies ahead in 2026. Coverage includes business tenancies, the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024, residential tenancies, building safety, service charge and outgoings, commonhold, electronic communications, contractual land controls, adverse possession, title...
For more detail on major developments relevant to Property and Property Disputes, and insight on forthcoming developments, consult the Practice Notes: Property key future developments tracker Property case tracker—2025 Further regular updates and in-depth commentary are available via both our current awareness alerts and highlights. Simply select ‘ Create Alert’ on your ‘ Alerts’ tab and adjust your personal settings to subscribe as required. Business tenancies What were the key developments in 2025 for business tenancies? In MVL Properties (2017) Ltd v The Leadmill Ltd [2025] EWHC 349 ( Ch), the landlord resisted a renewal of a business tenancy for the premises in issue operated as a music venue and nightclub, relying on ground (g) in section 30(1) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 ( LTA 1954), namely an intention to occupy the premises for its own trading...
In this issue: Enforcing security and property insolvency Disputes and remedies Electronic communications Key developments and horizon scanning Repairing obligations and dilapidations Property disputes in Scotland Additional Property Disputes updates Lex Talk®Property Disputes: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Latest Q& As Property Disputes Highlights 2025/2026 Enforcing security and property insolvency Affirmation of bank's security in mortgage breach proceedings ( Ashrafi v Belmont Green Finance) In Ashrafi v Belmont Green Finance [2025] EWHC 3247 ( Ch), the Chancery Division rejected the appeal brought by Mr and Mrs Ashrafi, thereby upholding a possession order in favour of Belmont Green Finance (the Bank) over their property. Unable to secure a mortgage themselves, they arranged for Mrs Ashrafi’s brother, Mr Shabir, to take out the loan on the...
Section 234 of the Insolvency Act 1986 stops short of trespassers ( Maher & Another v Investalet Ltd) Maher and Another v Investalet Ltd [2025] EWHC 3133 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? The ruling serves as a firm reminder that IA 1986, s 234 functions as a procedural device, not a catch‑all shortcut to vacant possession. It authorises an office‑holder to require delivery up of “property of the company” found in third-party hands, but it does not enhance the company’s substantive entitlements. In practice, office‑holders must differentiate between two situations: Occupiers whose rights flow from the company (for example, as tenant or licensee) and who hold something that can accurately be characterised as the company’s property within their possession, custody or control; and Occupiers who are, in truth, trespassers with a possessory stance that is weaker than the...
In this issue Service charges Disputes and remedies Trespass and adverse possession Contractual issues Repairing obligations and dilapidations Residential tenancies Neighbour and party wall disputes Key developments and horizon scanning Property disputes in Scotland Additional Property Disputes updates Lex Talk®Property Disputes: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Service charges Leaseholders not liable to contribute through service charges to remedy pre-existing structural defects in right to buy schemes ( The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Tower Hamlets v Various Leaseholders of Brewster House and Malting House) In The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Tower Hamlets v Various Leaseholders of Brewster House and Malting House [2025] EWCA Civ 1591, the Court of Appeal ( Civil...
In this issue Enforcing security and property insolvency Lease covenants and obligations Residential tenancies Disputes and remedies Property disputes in Scotland Additional Property Disputes updates Lex Talk®Property Disputes: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Latest Q& As Enforcing security and property insolvency Section 234 of the Insolvency Act 1986 cannot be used to obtain an order for vacant possession against trespassers ( Maher v Investalet). In Maher v Investalet [2025] EWHC 3133 ( Ch), the Chancery Division ( Companies Court) refused an application by the joint administrators of Pocket Renting Limited made under section 234 seeking vacant possession of five residential properties held by the company. The administrators attempted to retake the properties from Investalet, which had failed to pay rent since November 2023 and had then sub-let the dwellings without permission. While the court concluded that Investalet had no real defence to a...
In this issue: Key developments and horizon scanning Residential tenancies Trespass and adverse possession Service charges Enforcing security and property insolvency Disputes and remedies Property disputes in Scotland Additional Property Disputes updates Lex Talk®Property Disputes: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Key developments and horizon scanning Budget 2025 RICS submits Budget 2025 recommendations The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors ( RICS) has sent HM Treasury its pre‑ Budget advice, urging reform of business rates, greater powers for local authorities, faster progress towards green investment objectives and a better functioning planning regime. RICS also highlighted worries about mooted plans for an 8% National Insurance levy on landlords’ rental profits, pointing to commissioned findings indicating 62% of landlords would increase rents as a result and 40% would scale back property upgrades. See: LNB News 26/11/2025 36. Key Property announcements In Budget 2025, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the Rt Hon Rachel Reeves MP,...
Note: the CPRC has stopped sharing the background papers alongside the minutes, so no explanatory documents accompany this News Analysis to set out the matters discussed. A copy of the minutes appears here now: Minutes of CPRC meeting 3 October 2025. Welcome, apologies and introductory remarks (item 1) The Chair greeted members at the opening meeting of the legal year. Minutes from the 4 July 2025 meeting (see News Analysis: Minutes of the CPR Committee meeting—4 July 2025) were approved, and the action log was recorded as noted. Part 82—closed material procedure (item 2) Mo J officials outlined the subsequent tranche of reforms from Sir Duncan Ouseley’s 2022 CMP report findings. The Committee approved a revised new rule 82.26A, to be renamed ‘ Special Advocate Position Statement’ and reframed by reference to CPR 5.4B and 5.4C provisions. Subject to minor drafting tweaks, the rule will feature in the...
A copy of the minutes can be accessed here: OPRC Minutes for meeting on 20 October 2025. Welcome, apologies and introductory remarks (item 1) The Master of the Rolls ( MR) welcomed members and attendees to the Committee’s first open meeting. He made particular note of the new Senior President of Tribunals ( SPT), Sir James Dingemans, attending his first meeting in post. The MR invited nominations to a working group on unified contempt of court rules, stressing cross-jurisdictional experience. The minutes of the meeting on 14 July 2025 were approved (see News Analysis: Minutes of the OPR Committee meeting—14 July 2025). Consultation responses and priorities (item 2) The Committee reviewed the outcome of its summer consultation, which sought views on two principal proposals: the Digital Inclusion Framework and the Pre- Action Model ( PAM) grounded in Part 2 of the Judicial Review and Courts Act 2022......
Popular documents
When evaluating a general damages claim, the practitioner ought initially to refer to the Judicial College Guidelines (JCG)...
This Practice Note This Practice Note reviews mechanisms used in settling litigation. A Tomlin order consists of a consent order paired with a schedule. It operates to stay proceedings on terms that have been agreed. The provisions contained in the schedule may remain confidential. This Practice Note describes the scope of confidentiality attaching to the schedule and sets out how it differs from a standard consent order. Sample wording for a Tomlin order is included, alongside links to precedents, as well as guidance on court approval. It also addresses varying, setting aside and enforcing a Tomlin order, including the considerations the court will take into account when handling applications for each. Further guidance is provided on interpreting and applying the relevant provisions of the CPR; however, some courts and divisions impose very specific requirements for both drafting and approval, and for approaching the schedule and confidentiality issues. Accordingly, you must consider the particular rules and court guide provisions in the forum where your claim is proceeding when drawing up the Tomlin order...
Date [ date ] Parties [ name of Landlord ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Landlord) [ name of Tenant ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Tenant) [ [ name of Guarantor ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Guarantor) ] [ [ name of Mortgagee ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Mortgagee) ] Definitions Within this Deed, the terms below shall be interpreted as follows: [ Annual Rent • the annual sum reserved under the Lease; ] [ Insurance Rent • the Tenant’s share of the Landlord’s costs of insuring the Property (as set out in the Lease); ] Lease • the lease of the Property dated [ date ], entered into between (1) [ the Landlord OR [ name ...
I, [ name ], of [ address ], solemnly and sincerely state that: [ Matters to be verified, set out in numbered paragraphs ] I make this solemn statement in good conscience, believing it to be true, and pursuant to the provisions of the Statutory Declarations Act 1835. DECLARED at [ details ] this [ day ] day of [ month and year ] Before me ................................................................................ [ signature of the person before whom the declaration is made ] A [ commissioner for oaths OR [ solicitor OR [ insert other qualification ] ] authorised to administer oaths ]...
Discover more from LexisNexis
