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 Sole traders, informal partnerships and outdated partnership deeds are common.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: Repairing obligations and dilapidations Enforcing security and property insolvency Residential tenancies Enforcing security and property insolvency Disputes and remedies Residential tenancies Property disputes in Scotland Additional Property disputes updates Daily and weekly news alerts Dates for your diary Trackers Latest Q& A Repairing obligations and dilapidations RICS updates RICS updates Cladding External Wall Systems ( EWS) FAQs The Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors ( RICS) has revised its frequently asked questions ( FAQs) on cladding external wall systems ( EWS) to align with how the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 ( LFRA 2024) impacts the Building Safety Act 2022 ( BSA 2022). Part 8 of LFRA 2024 changes Part 5 of BSA 2022. These revisions affect the operation of cost recovery, remediation orders and...
Adams and others v Ministry of Defence [2024] EWHC 1966 ( KB) What are the practical implications of this case? This ruling underscores the need to commence and manage group litigation using the most fitting procedural route. For group claims brought on a single claim form, convenience remains the sole criterion. Practitioners should weigh the court’s convenience alongside that of the parties, and be ready to substantiate, with comparative evidence, why the selected procedure is more convenient than any alternatives. Where the court has determined common issues in a group claim but individual matters, such as quantum, still require determination, careful thought is needed about case management. Although CPR 7.3 empowers the court to disaggregate claims, it is unlikely to be convenient for the parties or the court for every individual claim to be, in effect, re‑issued. Technical...
In this issue Easements and covenants Property insolvency Trespass and adverse possession Repairing obligations and dilapidations Key developments and horizon scanning Disputes and remedies Property 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 Easements and covenants Successful application for prescriptive right of way over private road ( Sagier v Kaur) In Sagier v Kaur [2024] UKUT 217 ( LC), [2024] All ER ( D) 03 ( Aug), the Upper Tribunal ( Lands Chamber) (the UT) allowed the appellant’s appeal, overturning the First-tier Tribunal ( Property Chamber) (the FTT) direction to the Chief Land Registrar to cancel the appellant’s bid to register a private right of way over part of the...
Brown v Ulrick (as the liquidator of S. A. L. Holdings Ltd) S. A. L. Holdings Ltd (in members’ voluntary liquidation) [2024] EWHC 2041 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? This ruling highlights three key themes that merit special attention: Assessing evidence on an application under IR 2016, SI 2016/1024, r 14.8 — the judgment serves as a timely reminder for insolvency practitioners of the authorities on weighing written evidence where no cross-examination is ordered (see paras [58]–[60]). The court’s reasoning shows how this principled approach shaped its evaluation of the material across the judgment (see paras [56]–[100]). The correct measure of damages for a breach of a covenant not to alter — the court undertook a closely reasoned analysis explaining why, on these facts, expectation loss was preferred to reliance loss. This guidance will assist property and...
In this issue: Residential tenancies Electronic communications Disputes and remedies Lex Talk®Property Disputes: a Lexis®Nexis community Additional Property disputes updates Daily and weekly news alerts Dates for your diary Trackers Residential tenancies Level of financial penalties for house in multiple occupation offences ( Shorr v Camden London Borough Council) In Shorr v Camden London Borough Council [2024] UKUT 202 ( LC), [2024] All ER ( D) 120 ( Jul), the Upper Tribunal ( Lands Chamber) (the UT) partially allowed the appeal brought by the married appellants ( S and R). They challenged the First-tier Tribunal ( Property Chamber) (the FTT), which had rejected their argument that they had a reasonable excuse—namely a lack of knowledge—for not securing an HMO licence for a flat occupied by four tenants under Part 2 of the Housing Act 2004 ( HA 2004). Under the...
In this issue: Forfeiture Contractual issues Repairing obligations and dilapidations Service charges Key developments and horizon scanning 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 Trackers Latest Q& As Forfeiture Valuing a claim for wrongful forfeiture ( Tanfield (as executor of the Estate of Paul Watkins) v Meadowbrook Montessori Ltd) In Tanfield (as executor of the Estate of Paul Watkins) v Meadowbrook Montessori Ltd [2024] EWHC 1759 ( Ch), [2024] All ER ( D) 77 ( Jul), the court threw out a landlord’s winding-up petition for £167,593.41 presented against a company established to operate a school. It held there was a firmly arguable position that the majority of the petitioned sum was not rent arrears, but...
Lehner v Lant Street Management Ltd [2024] UKUT 0135 ( LC) What are the practical implications of this case? The BSA 2022 sets out a regime safeguarding leaseholders with ‘qualifying leases’ against paying, in whole or in part, service charges that would otherwise fall due from them as their contribution towards expenditure connected with ‘relevant defects’ arising out of post‑ Grenfell cladding remediation costs. Its widest protection relieves all leaseholders of any duty to fund ‘relevant measures’ where the landlord was ‘responsible for’ the particular defect. When that requirement is fulfilled, the protection is absolute and complete; accordingly, if it is not, leaseholder contributions still remain constrained by a ‘permitted maximum’ payable by leaseholders. The protections apply not only to the works themselves but also to associated professional fees and legal costs, including sums otherwise recoverable through service charges. The principal provisions lie in BSA 2022, s 122 and...
Tanfield (as executor of the Estate of Paul Watkins) and another company v Meadowbrook Montessori Ltd [2024] EWHC 1759 ( Ch), [2024] All ER ( D) 77 ( Jul) What are the practical implications of this case? The court’s assessment of the respondent’s cross‑claim is especially significant for the following reasons: Forfeiture and the common law rules—the judgment sets out the arguments underpinning the company’s ‘strongly arguable case’ that a purported forfeiture by peaceable re‑entry was unlawful where no formal common law demand for rent was made before re‑entry and the lease did not waive the requirement for such a demand (see paras [75]–[84]). This element of the ruling serves as a useful reminder of the prior demand rules at common law which may bite where a proviso for re‑entry in the lease does not expressly dispense with the necessity for a formal rent demand....
In this issue: Key developments and horizon scanning Repairing obligations and dilapidations Rent and rates Enforcing security and property insolvency Trespass and adverse possession Disputes and remedies Service charges Easements and covenants Lex Talk®Property Disputes: a Lexis®Nexis community Additional Property disputes updates Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Trackers Key developments and horizon scanning King’s Speech 2024—property measures The 2024 King’s Speech set out property measures anticipated from Labour’s election campaign, including ending ‘no-fault’ evictions in the private rented sector and progressing Law Commission proposals on enfranchisement, commonhold and the right to manage. The supporting background briefing, adding further detail, confirms reforms will include regulating ground rents—trailed during Labour’s campaign but excluded from the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 ( LFRA 2024)—and also points to abolishing residential forfeiture. That issue has been contemplated for a considerable time: the Law Commission’s 2006 report, ‘ Termination of Tenancies for Tenant Default’ (which was not confined to...
Note: the CPRC has stopped distributing the supporting papers alongside the minutes, so this News Analysis does not include documents setting out the matters considered. A copy of the minutes can be accessed here: Minutes of the CPR meeting. Note: Although item 4 of the 10 May 2024 CPR Committee minutes ( Clinical negligence fixed recoverable costs) indicated time would be set aside at the June 2024 meeting to consider FRC proposals for sub-£25,000 clinical negligence claims, this topic did not appear in the June 2024 minutes. As it had been warned that failure to settle amendments at the June meeting might jeopardise the October 2024 commencement date, the scheme may now slip to the April 2025 CPR update cycle. Welcome, action log and matters arising (item 1) The 10 May 2024 minutes were approved and the action log noted—see News Analysis: Minutes of the CPR...
In this issue: Key developments and horizon scanning 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 Trackers Latest Q& As Key developments and horizon scanning Likely property developments under a Labour government Following the 4 July 2024 general election, the UK now has a Labour government—the first since 2010. We outline what the property sector may expect from this administration by reviewing Labour’s pre-election announcements, its Manifesto, and the current legislative landscape it must navigate. See News Analysis: Likely property developments under a Labour government. Built environment industry responds to general election 2024 After the results on 5 July 2024, multiple bodies within the built environment have shared their reactions. See: LNB News 05/07/2024 33......
Note: the CPRC has stopped sharing the underpinning papers alongside the minutes; accordingly, this News Analysis is not accompanied by documents elucidating the discussions. A copy of the minutes is available here: Minutes of the CPR Committee meeting. Welcome, action log and matters arising (item 1 and 2) The CPRC approved the minutes of its annual public meeting held on 12 April 2024—see News Analysis: Minutes of the CPR Committee meeting—12 April 2024. The following matters were discussed: Online Procedure Rule Committee ( OPRC)—although formally launched in November 2023, a statutory instrument defining the proceedings within which it may set rules still requires Parliamentary approval and is not expected to take effect until the autumn small claims track automatic referral to mediation pilot— CPR PD 51ZE commenced on 22 May 2024 within the 166th Practice Direction update. The pilot will route eligible civil money...
Labour’s manifesto, ‘ Change’, set out a programme the party vowed to deliver once in government, a position it has now achieved. The stream of reform in property law and measures touching the property industry — the Leasehold Reform ( Ground Rent) Act 2022, the Levelling-up and Regeneration Act 2023 ( LURA 2023) and the Building Safety Act 2022 ( BSA 2022) — shows no sign of slowing now Labour holds power. Reforms from recent years continue to shape the property landscape, with no indication of abatement under the new government. Labour’s position suggests continuity rather than pause in this agenda for now. Leasehold and enfranchisement reform The incoming administration must progress the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 ( LFRA 2024), which secured Royal Assent in the ‘wash up’ on Parliament’s final day before dissolution. Most of LFRA 2024 will be commenced by...
In this issue: Trespass and adverse possession Electronic Communications Disputes and remedies Neighbour and party wall disputes Repairing obligations and dilapidations Lex Talk®Property Disputes: a Lexis®Nexis community Additional Property disputes updates Daily and weekly news alerts Trackers New and updated content Latest Q& As Trespass and adverse possession Adverse possession and estoppel under paragraph 5(2) of Schedule 6 to the Land Registration Act 2002 ( El Massouri v Omani Estates Ltd) In El Massouri v Omani Estates Ltd [2024] All ER ( D) 72 ( Mar), [2024] EWHC 534 ( Ch), the claimant obtained planning consent and extended her top-floor flat into the loft above. That loft space had been demised to the defendant’s predecessor in title, with the lease granted without section 5 Landlord & Tenant Act 1987 notice and without the...
Parliamentary process On 22 May 2024, the Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak, asked the King to dissolve Parliament so a general election could take place on 4 July 2024, and the King consented. As a result, Parliament was prorogued on 24 May 2024 and formally dissolved on 30 May 2024. The parliamentary timetable is set out below: 22 May: The Prime Minister asked the King to use the prerogative to dissolve Parliament 22 May: King Charles approved the request and a general election was announced nationwide 23 May: ‘ Wash-up’ period begins 24 May: Parliament is prorogued 25 May: Pre-election period of sensitivity begins (previously known as ‘purdah’) 30 May: Parliament is dissolved 30 May: Pre-election period starts 4 July: General election 17 July: State Opening of Parliament For an explanation of the ‘wash-up’ period and the period of...
Gravesham Borough Council v On Tower UK Ltd [2024] UKUT 151 ( LC) What are the practical implications of this case? Code rights are widely regarded as offering operators greater advantages than renewal rights under LTA 1954, Pt II, due to more favourable valuation assumptions and the curtailed scope for site providers to resist renewals. Put shortly, the Code’s approach to valuation and opposition renders it operator-facing, in contrast to the 1954 Act renewal framework. In consequence of the ruling in Cornerstone Telecommunications Infrastructure Ltd v Compton Beauchamp Estates Ltd [2022] 1 WLR 3360 ( Compton Beauchamp), the Tribunal lacks jurisdiction to entertain an application for a fresh agreement under the Code where the relevant site is held under a tenancy that had the protection of the LTA 1954......
In this issue: Key developments and horizon scanning Trespass and adverse possession Disputes and remedies Contractual issues Service charges Property disputes in Scotland Lex Talk®Property Disputes: a Lexis®Nexis community Additional Property disputes updates Daily and weekly news alerts Trackers Latest Q& As Key developments and horizon scanning RICS responds to political parties’ manifestos The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors has issued its response to parties’ positions on business rates, the high street and regeneration. RICS signalled that the next decade will be unlike any other for commercial property, and the next government will need to partner with the sector to confront industry challenges. See LNB News 21/06/2024 39. Trespass and adverse possession Claim for possession against student protesters ( University of Birmingham v Persons Unknown) In University of Birmingham v Persons Unknown [2024] All ER ( D) 84 ( Jun),...
In this issue: Forfeiture Key developments and horizon scanning Repairing obligations and dilapidations 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 Trackers Latest Q& As Forfeiture Forfeiture—breach notification covenant ( Tropical Zoo v Hounslow LBC) Tropical Zoo v Hounslow LBC [2024] EWHC 1240 ( Ch) addresses forfeiture, waiver and relief, and could influence future lease wording while prompting renewed arguments on waiver. Commentary by David Jones, associate at Womble Bond Dickinson. See News Analysis: Forfeiture—breach notification covenant ( Tropical Zoo v Hounslow LBC) Key developments and horizon scanning The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors has reviewed and commented on the general election housing proposals set out by the Conservative, Liberal Democrat, Labour, Green and Reform parties. See LNB News...
The Tropical Zoo Ltd v The Mayor and Burgesses of Hounslow London Borough Council [2024] EWHC 1240 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? The court upheld a covenant rarely encountered in commercial leases, requiring a tenant to “remedy any breach of a Tenant Covenant Notified by the Landlord to the Tenant as soon as possible and in any event within two months after service of the Notice”. This covenant (9.1) appears to have been included because of the customised nature of the arrangement—i.e. a local authority granting a lease, probably at a discount, to support the operation of a zoo within its area. The clause grants landlords a renewed opportunity to act, enabling forfeiture for a breach even where the right to forfeit for that same breach has already been waived. The High Court’s confirmation that this drafting works as...
Di Bari and others v Avon Ground Rents Ltd [2024] Lexis Citation 311 What are the practical implications of this case? This judgment demonstrates that a remediation order can still be imposed even where a landlord, after being made aware of the problems, has taken a proactive stance and is plainly committed to undertaking the requisite remedial works. The landlord drew attention to an example in the notes to BSA 2022, s 123: life-safety critical works to address historic cladding and non-cladding defects have not commenced three years after identification, and the landlord continues to omit action notwithstanding contact from leaseholders and the fire and rescue authority urging that works begin. The circumstances here were markedly different, yet the Tribunal decided that the harm to leaseholders from refusing an order outweighed any disadvantage to the landlord from having a binding, enforceable...
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
