Property

The County Court handed down judgment in UBS AG v Kei and ors, which concerned securing a possession order to enforce a loan of £46.8 million, an order to transfer up to the High Court for enforcement and dismissing a counterclaim for £5.5 million.  During the six-day trial, the Court considered issues of promissory estoppel, proprietary estoppel, unjust enrichment, negligent misstatement, and the Court’s discretion under s. 36 of the Administration of Justice Act 1970 in circumstances where there are freezing orders expressly prohibiting dealing with the property.

Read the full judgment

Fancourt J gave judgment in the long awaited case of Cooper v Ludgate House Ltd and Powell v Ludgate House Ltd in which the owners of two adjoining flats sought an injunction to require the developer of the Bankside Yards development to pull down part of the development on the grounds that it interfered with their rights of light.

The court refused injunctive relief and awarded the flat owners only a small proportion of the sums they had sought as damages in lieu of an injunction.

Read the full judgment 

The Supreme Court handed down judgment in Waller-Edwards v One Savings Bank plc, providing clarification about the circumstances in which a bank is “put on inquiry” that a mortgage has been procured by undue influence. Where a lender is put on inquiry, the lending and any associated mortgage may be set aside unless the bank can show that steps have been taken to ensure that the borrower is aware of the nature of the transaction and has received legal advice on it.

The County Court held that the bank was not put on inquiry by the fact that an element of the loan was understood to be used to pay off debts in Mr Bishop’s sole name. This was upheld in the High Court and Court of Appeal. The Supreme Court, however, allowed Ms Waller-Edwards’ appeal. It held that a creditor is put on inquiry in any non-commercial hybrid transaction where, on the face of the transaction, there is more than a trivial element of borrowing which serves to discharge the debts of one of the borrowers and so might not be to the financial advantage of the other.

Read the full judgment

Criterion Group – the landlord of c. £4bn of property in central London – has been required by Mr Justice Richards to repay hundreds of thousands of pounds of overcharged insurance rent to one of its tenants, Picturehouse Cinemas. Criterion has engaged in this practice for years, sometimes earning commissions of 60%, and pocketing more than £1m a year, all at the expense of its tenants.

In this judgment Mr Justice Richards held that Criterion was not entitled to do so under the terms of the lease. He also held that Picturehouse was entitled to claim back insurance rent that was overpaid as a result in restitution.

Read the full judgment

The High Court handed down judgment in this case, which concerned a claim to rescind the purchase of a £32million townhouse in Notting Hill on the basis of allegedly fraudulent answers to pre-contract enquiries. The alleged fraud, which has been widely covered in the national press, concerned the failure to disclose an alleged moth infestation at the property in circumstances where one enquiry had asked if there had ever been a “vermin infestation”.

Read the full judgment

A major piece of long-running litigation came to an end on 17 December 2024, with the announcement that Annington Homes will sell approximately 36,000 properties housing armed forces personnel and their families back to the Ministry of Defence for £6bn.

This comes 30 years after a privatisation deal, involving a sale of the married quarters estate to Annington and leaseback to the MOD. The deal has been widely criticised, with the National Audit Office estimating in 2018 that the taxpayer was £2.2bn – £4.2bn worse off over the first 21 years of the arrangements than if it had retained the estate. In 2019 the Public Accounts Committee called it “disastrous”.

The Court of Appeal handed down judgment  in an important case concerning the jurisdiction to award costs in proceedings in the First Tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) (‘F-tT’) and the Upper Tribunal. Under Rule 13 of the relevant Tribunal Rules, costs can, essentially, only be awarded against another party where that party has ‘acted unreasonably in bringing, defending or conducting proceedings’. There is an equivalent rule for the Upper Tribunal, which is identically worded. This case now becomes the definitive ruling as to what ‘unreasonably’ means in this context.

Read the full judgment

The Supreme Court overturned the Court of Appeal’s judgment and held that where foul water was discharged into watercourses a common law claim for nuisance could be maintained. The Court, however, made clear that whether injunctive relief would follow would require consideration of the impact of such relief on the applicable regulatory framework. The Supreme Court also rejected the submission that Marcic v Thames Water plc [2003] UKHL 66 should be overruled: so, the only remedy for sewer flooding due to the inadequacy of sewerage infrastructure as described in Marcic was through the regulatory framework under the Water Industry Act 1991.

Read the full judgment

The Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal allowed the appeal and held that, on the proper construction of the deed of mutual covenants (DMC), the external walls are common parts in that multi-storey building. The relevant character of the external walls is to be determined by reference to the DMC, though the first assignment may be referred to as an aid to construction in case of ambiguity in the DMC.

Read the full judgment

A Court of Appeal case claiming restitution of alleged overcharges for sewerage services. The judgment clarifies the operation of the burden of proof in such circumstances, and provides guidance about the ability of factual witnesses to give expert evidence without the Court’s permission which will be of interest to practitioners more generally.

Read the full judgment

High Court grants specific performance of three leasehold options.

The Claimant had served valid notices to exercise valuable options in three leases but had omitted to pay the 10% deposits which were due by midnight on the date the Claimant exercised the options.

Read the full judgment

The case, one of The Lawyer’s Top 20 Cases of 2023, concerns a multimillion-pound property on The Bishop’s Avenue (sometimes known as “Billionaire’s Row”) in North London.

The judgment, in addition to dealing with questions of Liechtenstein, Swiss and Shari’a Law, addresses a number of principles of English property and trusts law and conflicts of laws.

Read the full judgment

The Court of Appeal gives important guidance on some of the grounds on which a landlord may oppose the grant of a new tenancy to a business tenant under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954.

Read the full judgment

Successfully obtaining summary judgment in the defendants’ favour.

This judgment is be of especial interest to commercial lenders, particularly those operating in the realm of property and development finance.

Read the full judgment

The 342-page judgment contains much that will be of interest to practitioners in the field, including findings on the nature of fiduciary duties owed by different kinds of property agents, and the nature of negotiating damages for breaches of broad NDAs.

Read the full judgment

The latest round of the litigation between the Manchester Ship Canal Company and United Utilities Water Ltd about discharges from sewers into the canal. Supreme Court judgment awaited.

A Supreme Court appeal concerning the law of continuing private nuisance. The Claimants, who live and own property by or in the hinterland of the Nigerian Atlantic shoreline, brought a claim against various entities in the Royal Dutch Shell group of companies in respect of an oil spill that occurred in the offshore Bonga oil field in late 2011. This was one of the largest offshore oil spills in Nigerian oil exploration history.

Read the full judgment

The Cayman Islands Court of Appeal clarifies important aspects of Cayman Islands’ property law regarding restrictive agreements, easements and Land Register rectification.

Much-talked-about Covid rent arrears claims heard together in the Court of Appeal. Recognised as Estates Gazette’s top property case of 2022.

Read the full judgment

Three Supreme Court cases heard together. The first time the Supreme Court case has considered the new Telecoms Code. And the first Supreme Court ruling on who is an occupier for the purposes of the Telecoms Code. The judgment is a significant boost for operators and will make it much easier for them to secure the agreements required for the roll out of 5G services. Recognised as one of Estates Gazette’s Top 10 Cases of 2022.

Read the full the judgment

The most significant restrictive covenant case to reach the Court of Appeal for 10 years, settling the issue as to whether a restrictive covenant can be annexed to a ‘neighbourhood’.

Read the full judgment

A landmark decision in the most complex mines and minerals case to be litigated for many years (decades). The case was about the ownership of mudstone across 40 titles covering hundreds of acres of forestry land controlled by the defendant, Natural Resources.

Read the full judgment

A high-profile case about tenant break clauses. The matter concerned a three-storey modern commercial unit, constructed in 2000, outside Leeds.

Read the full judgment

A Court of Appeal case about the process by which business tenants agree to give up the security of tenure they would otherwise have under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954.

Read the full judgment

The first ever case in which the highest court (whether House of Lords or Supreme Court) has considered s.84(1) of the Law of Property Act 1925 – the power of the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) to modify or discharge restrictive covenants.

Read the full judgment

The Court of Appeal gives important clarity and breathing space to commercial and residential tenants by confirming that all parts of proceedings involving a claim for possession brought by a landlord are automatically stayed.

Read the full judgment

Estates Gazette’s No. 1 Property Case of 2020. A Supreme Court appeal with very important ramifications for flat owners and the landlords of blocks of flats. The Supreme Court decided that if a landlord has promised leaseholders that it will enforce the covenants in their neighbours’ leases, it cannot give permission for works to other flats without the consent of everybody in the block.

Read the full judgment

The first case in the Court of Appeal on Interim Rights and temporary Rights under the new Telecommunications Code. The result has been a massive boost for mobile phone operators in terms of their ability to put telcoms kit where they like.

Read the full judgment

The Supreme Court by majority of 3 to 2 reverses unanimous Court of Appeal decision and holds that a landlord’s refusal of consent to an application for change of planning use was reasonable.

Read the full judgment

Success in the Court of Appeal in the highest value case in this country on the question of when a Court can intervene in an expert determination under a property contract.

Read the full judgment

A case about whether a developer, Abbeygate Helical, had fulfilled its obligation to use ‘reasonable endeavours’ to satisfy certain conditions ‘as soon as reasonably practicable’ so as to trigger an obligation to make a £1.4million overage payment. The conditions related to ’site assembly’, specifically the acquisition of and variation to various interests to enable the development to take place.

Read the full judgment

The Court of Appeal overturns the decision of Birss J that a standard form of fencing covenant should be treated as an anomalous “fencing easement”, capable of binding successors in title.

Read the full judgement

The first case to go to the Supreme Court on the business tenancies legislation, under which business tenants are entitled to renew their leases when they come to an end. It affects large numbers of business tenants and their landlords.

Read the full judgment

After a three-week trial the High Court dismissed the Claimants’ claims for fraudulent misrepresentation and breach of a property joint venture agreement.

Read the full judgment

This was the first case under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1988 relating to residential long leases, to reach the higher courts.

Read the full judgment

The Court of Appeal considered the correct approach to cases of alleged abuse of process comprising a failure to follow the guidelines in relation to overlapping claims set out in Aldi Stores [2008] 1 WLR 748.

Read the full judgment

Read the full judgment

Read the full judgment

Read the full judgment

Read the full judgment here

Read the full judgment

Read the full judgment