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 Sole traders, informal partnerships and outdated partnership deeds are common.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
AP Wireless II ( UK) Ltd v ON Tower UK Ltd [2024] UKUT 429 ( LC) The Upper Tribunal’s judgment in AP Wireless II ( UK) Ltd v ON Tower UK Ltd [2024] UKUT 429 ( LC), published on 18 December 2024, examines the central question of whether an operator taking an assignment of a licence concerning electronic communications apparatus under the Code should be regarded as ‘a party to a Code agreement’ for Part 5 purposes, even where that assignee owes no obligations to the licensor (site provider) to perform the agreement. Part 5 of the Code addresses the termination of Code agreements and sets out a key procedure, for example where a property owner intends to redevelop and must bring the Code agreement to an end. The ruling applies solely to licences or wayleaves entered into before 28 December 2017....
In this issue: Residential tenancies Key developments and horizon scanning Enfranchisement and right to manage Enforcing security and property insolvency Disputes and remedies Lex Talk®Property Disputes: a Lexis®Nexis community Additional Property Disputes updates Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Latest Q& As Residential tenancies Sanctions for landlords who fail to provide Electrical Condition Reports to contract holders in Wales under the Renting Homes ( Wales) Act 2016 ( Coastal Housing Group v Mitchell) In Coastal Housing Group v Mitchell [2024] EWHC 2831 ( Ch), the Divisional Court held that rent is not due from contract-holders in Wales unless and until landlords supply them with Electrical Condition Reports ( ECRs) for their homes. This is the first reported ruling on the interpretation of the Renting Homes ( Wales) Act 2016 ( RH( W) A 2016), which took...
Coastal Housing Group Ltd and others v Mitchell and others [2024] EWHC 2831 ( CH) What are the practical implications of this case? In brief: the impact could be vast. It is now established that contract-holders across both social housing and the private rented sector may suspend rent for any period in which their landlord is not compliant with reg. 6. The court regarded this as a simple and effective lever for contract-holders to prompt swift remedial action by landlords (paras [116]–[117], [201]). A contract-holder who takes this course—so long as they can demonstrate the landlord’s non-compliance—will not be required to reimburse the withheld sums, even after receiving their ECR. What remains unresolved is the situation where a contract-holder continued to pay during non-compliance, perhaps because they were unaware of the right to withhold or for another reason. That reflects the...
Malik and others v Messalti [2024] EWHC 2713 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? The emphasis under IA 1986, s 423(3) lies on the transferor’s subjective aim, rather than the consequences of the disposition. A transfer for less than full value can be impugned under IA 1986, s 423 where the transferor’s broad, abstract intention is to keep assets out of creditors’ reach, even without contemplating any specific existing or prospective creditor or class. There is no requirement for the transferor to know of any, or all, actual or potential creditors at the time of the transfer. A gift, or a declaration of trust, is only vulnerable if the prohibited purpose is proved (though it need not be the sole reason for the deal). The transferor’s awareness (or lack of awareness) of particular creditors may inform the factual inquiry into...
In this issue: Enforcing security and property insolvency Repairing obligations and dilapidations Disputes and remedies Residential tenancies Easements and covenants Service charges Contractual issues Enfranchisement and right to manage Electronic communications Key developments and horizon scanning Lex Talk®Property Disputes: a Lexis®Nexis community Additional Property Disputes updates Daily and weekly news alerts Latest Q& As Debt respite scheme—jurisdiction ( Seculink Ltd v Forbes) In Seculink Ltd v Forbes [2024] EWHC 3339 ( Ch), the first appellate decision in the High Court on the unexpectedly far‑reaching Debt Respite Scheme ( Breathing Space Moratorium and Mental Health Crisis Moratorium) ( England and Wales) Regulations 2020, SI 2020/1311, the creditor’s appeal succeeded, in a ruling notably favourable to creditors. Sir Anthony Mann concluded that: (1) the courts at all times have...
Residential leasehold reform In November 2024, the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government ( MHCLG) unveiled a bold package of proposed leasehold changes slated for 2025, including commencement of the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 ( LFRA 2024) and further steps to reform leasehold and commonhold. LFRA 2024 The government’s anticipated schedule for bringing LFRA 2024 into effect is: In January 2025, the measure abolishing the ‘2-year rule’ is due to start, allowing leaseholders to extend their lease or buy their freehold without waiting two years after purchase In spring 2025, right to manage reforms (broadening access, reshaping costs and voting rights) will take effect as one coherent package, enabling more leaseholders in mixed-use buildings to assume management from freeholders, and meaning leaseholders bringing claims will, in most instances, no longer meet their freeholder’s costs In early 2025, the...
Hackney London Borough Council v Weintraub [2024] EWCA Civ 1561 What are the practical implications of this case? Lady Justice Asplin’s leading judgment offers a helpful overview of earlier case law in this sphere and ought to be considered by local authorities and legal practitioners. The decision turns on a point not previously explored in the authorities and, while noteworthy, is unlikely to have broad, everyday application. Even so, it gives greater weight to a tenant’s claim that they will return to the dwelling once the right to buy has completed, and makes clear that they may come back as an owner-occupier rather than as a tenant. Disputes concerning the tenancy condition more commonly focus on the risk of eviction than on preventing a right to buy from moving forward. The court concluded that a right to buy application may proceed if the tenant can...
Note: the CPRC has stopped sharing the supporting papers with the minutes, so no explanatory documents accompany this News Analysis. A copy of the minutes is available here: Minutes of the Civil Procedure Rule Committee. Welcome, action log and matters arising (item 1) The minutes of the 4 October 2024 meeting were approved-see News Analysis: Minutes of the CPR Committee meeting-4 October 2024. Law Commission consultation on the law of contempt (item 2) A presentation outlined the Law Commission’s consultation on contempt of court. Its wide scope was acknowledged, setting out potential reforms across multiple areas: liability protection and powers of courts and tribunals procedure representation and legal aid sanctions appeals The Commission’s view that a single procedural code should apply across different jurisdictions was emphasised, with a preference that any updated civil procedure provisions be contained within a further revised CPR 81. It was...
Switaj v Mc Clenaghan [2024] EWCA Civ 1457 What are the practical implications of this case? The Tenant Fees Act 2019, in force from 1 June 2019, was designed to stop landlords and letting agents adding extra charges to tenants in connection with residential lettings. Save where expressly allowed by TFA 2019, Sch 1, such payments are banned. If a prohibited payment has been demanded and not repaid, reliance on section 21 of the Housing Act 1988 ( HA 1988) to obtain possession is precluded ( TFA 2019, s 17(3)). This decision considers the scenario where money was taken before the TFA 2019 commenced, and whether it can nonetheless amount to a prohibited payment, thereby rendering a notice under HA 1988, s 21 invalid. The point is important because numerous tenancies that commenced before 2019 involved sums which, while lawful at the time, would today be...
In this issue Service charges Enfranchisement and right to manage Trespass and adverse possession Disputes and remedies Property disputes in Scotland Lex Talk®Property Disputes: a Lexis®Nexis community Additional Property Disputes updates Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Latest Q& As Service charges Burden of proof in establishing reasonableness of service charges for communal electricity costs ( Avon Ground Rents Ltd v Pilgrim) In Avon Ground Rents Ltd v Pilgrim [2024] UKUT 400 ( LC), the landlord and management company (the appellants) challenged a First-tier Tribunal, Property Chamber decision on service charges under long flat leases. The Upper Tribunal ruled they could not pass on communal electricity costs to the respondent leaseholders. The appellants provided no material to undermine the respondents’ evidence that solar panels powered the common parts for...
Kimberly Moh & others v Rimal Properties Ltd; Dr James Kelly & others v Bostall Estates Ltd [2024] UKUT 324 ( LC) (18 October 2024) What are the practical implications of this case? This ruling delivers a clear, concise and practical recap of the approach to working out relevant time limits in practice, while also flagging a potential pitfall for the inattentive reader. Under section 41(2)(b) of the Housing and Planning Act 2016 ( HPA 2016), it was accepted that the window for applying for a rent repayment order strictly expires on the very day the application is lodged. The judge therefore had to carefully decide when the ‘period of 12 months ending’ on that date starts, so as to determine whether the statutory offence (under HA 2004, s 72) was committed within that timeframe. In her given reasons, the judge approved the general common law...
In this issue: Repairing obligations and dilapidations Residential tenancies Business tenancies Rents and rates Easements and covenants Disputes and remedies Contractual issues Key developments and horizon scanning Lex Talk®Property Disputes: a Lexis®Nexis community Additional Property disputes updates Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers New Q& As Repairing obligations and dilapidations Breach of occupiers’ liability duty of care due to inadequate motor racing barrier protective devices ( Byrne v Motorsport Vision Racing Ltd) In Byrne v Motorsport Vision Racing Ltd [2024] EWHC 2966 ( KB), His Honour Judge Blair KC, acting as a Deputy High Court Judge in a personal injury matter, held that the first defendant ( MSVR), the second defendant ( MSV), and the fourth defendant ( MCRCB) had breached the duty of care owed to the claimant, a professional motorcycle racer injured during a test day for the British Superbike Championship. The court found a breach of the...
In this issue: Trespass and adverse possession Lease covenants and alterations Disputes and remedies Key developments and horizon scanning Lex Talk®Property Disputes: a Lexis®Nexis community Additional Property disputes updates Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers New Q& As Trespass and adverse possession The freedoms of expression and assembly can be curtailed to avert trespass on private land, as illustrated by The University of London v Harvie- Clark [2024] EWHC 2895 ( Ch). The University sought an interim, precautionary injunction against identified defendants and persons unknown to stop incursions onto its estate arising from continuing protests. The court held the criteria for such relief against persons unknown were satisfied: a proper cause of action was shown; the claimant had given full and frank...
Malik v Malik; Malik and others v Malik [2024] EWCA Civ 1323 What are the practical implications of this case? Although several issues were resolved in the proceedings between the brothers, the key point for legal practitioners concerns estoppel by conduct. This doctrine bars a person from advancing a claim or right that conflicts with earlier statements or positions adopted through their actions. It arises where one party has relied, to their detriment, on the other’s representations or behaviour. In this appeal, the Court of Appeal determined that, at a prior application hearing in 2012, Vaqar made representations that stopped him from relying on any entitlement to the property said to arise from adverse possession. At the 2012 hearing, it was established that he told the Judge he was not advancing, and would not advance, a claim to the property by way of adverse...
Clapham and others v Narga [2024] EWCA Civ 1388 How does this ruling affect practice in reality?...
In this issue: Business tenancies Residential tenancies Disputes and remedies Rent and rates Contractual issues Property disputes in Scotland Lex Talk®Property Disputes: a Lexis®Nexis community Additional Property disputes updates Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers New Q& As Business tenancies Law Commission launches consultation on right to renew business tenancies The Law Commission has opened a consultation to review how the right to renew business tenancies under Part 2 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 operates, and whether it serves the needs of business tenants and landlords. The consultation aims to evaluate the effectiveness of the existing ‘contracting out’ framework and to consider alternative approaches, including mandatory security, abolishing security of tenure, and a ‘contracting-in’ model. It also looks at which kinds of...
In this issue: Key developments and horizon scanning Trespass and adverse possession Disputes and remedies Residential tenancies Rent and rates Repairing obligations and dilapidations Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Latest Q& A Key developments and horizon scanning Law Commission to consult on right to renew business tenancies The Law Commission has confirmed it will consult on the right to renew business tenancies as part of its review of Part 2 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 ( LTA 1954), with a consultation document due for release on 19 November 2024. The paper will ask core questions about prospective reforms to Part 2 of the LTA 1954. After this first consultation, the Commission plans to issue a second, technical, consultation. See: LNB News 11/11/2024 37. Trespass and adverse possession Adverse possession and boundary dispute ( Clapham v Narga) In the Court of Appeal decision of Clapham v Narga [2024] EWCA Civ 1388, the...
Khan and others v Khan [2024] EWHC 2491 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? This decision contributes to the growing jurisprudence on trusts of family property where there is scant or no paperwork. In such matters, the court must reconstruct intentions and make findings from longstanding, informal family arrangements, often stretching back decades, in the absence of formal written records to clarify how interests were intended to be held. What was the background? The dispute concerned four addresses: 14 Stapleton Road, 7 Essex Grove, 53 Norbury Crescent and 5 Ullswater. Mr Khan was central to acquiring the Properties, although legal ownership and mortgages were, at times, placed in the names of different children from the outset. The children— Ahmed, Sarwar, Muhammed (the ‘ Sons’), together with Shalima, Farhana and Jennifer (the ‘ Daughters’)—each asserted differing stakes in the Properties. Through a series of...
Note: the CPRC has ceased distributing the supporting background papers alongside the minutes; accordingly, this News Analysis does not include documents elucidating the topics considered. A copy of the minutes can be found here: Minutes of the Civil Procedure Rule Committee. Welcome, action log and matters arising (item 1) The minutes of the 5 July meeting were formally approved and the action log was noted—see News Analysis: Minutes of the CPR Committee meeting—5 July 2024. The following items were considered: Ryan Morris v Williams & Co Solicitors [2024] EWCA Civ 376—the matter had previously been covered under item 4 in the Minutes of the CPR Committee meeting—held 5 July 2024......
Cabo v Dezotti [2024] EWCA Civ 1358 What are the practical implications of this case? The ruling clearly illustrates that, just as the court may look beyond the wording of a licence to determine whether it is truly a tenancy, it will also scrutinise the surrounding circumstances to decide who is the landlord for the purposes of RRO liability in practice. In this matter, arcane submissions about the provisions of a management agreement between the appellant and a managing company did not ultimately succeed in relieving the appellant of responsibility. What was the background? The appellant had entered into a management agreement with Top Holdings Ltd ( THL). Among other things, it enabled THL to arrange letting of the relevant property, but only by way of licence agreements for holiday use alone, and further required that THL may let the Property only to...
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
