In about 1930 a house, no 16, one of two adjacent houses in common ownership was rebuilt. One wall was built close against the adjacent no. 14. Thirty years later no. 14 was demolished by its later owner, the Defendant, leaving the adjoining wall of no.16, which was rough and unpointed, exposed to the weather. … Continue reading Phipps v Pears and others: CA 10 Mar 1964
The parties, a married couple disputed the shares in which the matrimonial home, formerly held by them as joint tenants would be held after severance o that joint tenancy. Held: The wife was entitled to a half share in the property.Russell LJ considered that the court had no jurisdiction under section 17 of the 1882 … Continue reading Bedson v Bedson: CA 1965
‘A deed, whether executed by a corporation or by an individual, does not necessarily bind the grantor as soon as it is sealed. It only becomes binding when it has been ‘delivered’ by the grantor as his deed, i.e., when the grantor has indicated by words or conduct that he intends the deed which he … Continue reading Windsor Refrigerator Co Ltd v Branch Nominees: 1961
A notice of an assignment of a debt need not state the date of the assignment. Citations: [1969] 1 QB 607 Statutes: Law of Property Act 1925 136 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Cited – W F Harrison and Co v Burke 1956 If a notice of assignment of a debt describes the assignment by … Continue reading Van Lynn Developments Ltd v Pelvis Construction Co Ltd: 1969
A was by will given a right to reside rent-free in a house. She left due to ill health, and the trustees for sale sold. The question was whether A was entitled to the income of the proceeds of sale on the ground that the house was settled land and A the tenant for life. … Continue reading Ayer v Benton: 1967
Objecting neighbours appealed against a decision allowing a variation of a restrictive covenant to allow the owner to convert a dwellinghouse into two self-contained apartments. Held: The appeal failed. The power in the 1985 Act to vary a covenant must be used judicially, and ‘the statute does not create any presumption in favour of the … Continue reading Lawntown Ltd v Camenzuli and Another: CA 10 Oct 2007
No general distinction is to be drawn between the two types of mortgage and sub-mortgage. The court considered the practice for a mortgagor to attorn tenant to his mortgagee. The tenancy contained no covenants and was merely a device to give the mortgagee a right to obtain summary judgment for possession under the Small Tenements … Continue reading Regent Oil Co Ltd v JA Gregory (Hatch End) Ltd: CA 1966
The tribunal considered case concerned 5.1 ha of land with an assumption of planning permission for industrial development under Planning legislation. There was only one possible access over adjoining land in different ownership. Held: When determining the value of land compulsorily acquired by the Corporation, the Tribunal allowed for the fact that the landowner would … Continue reading Stokes v Cambridge Corporation: LT 1961
A covenant prevented new building other than for a garage. The owner proposed a three-car garage extension, but with a play-room above, for the applicant’s own use. The relevant property of the objector was not her own house, but consisted of a driveway, and a plot of land on which she hoped to be allowed … Continue reading Skupinski, Re Law of Property Act 1925: LT 30 Nov 2004
Tenants occupied land next to land which was to be developed after compulsory acquisition. The tenants and the landlords asserted a right of light over the land, and sought an injunction to prevent the development. The developer denied that any right of light had been acquired. The sky contour diagrams projected that the reductions in … Continue reading Midtown Ltd v City of London Real Property Company Ltd: ChD 20 Jan 2005
The deceased had assigned his coal merchant business to the respondent against a promise to pay andpound;5.00 a week to his widow whilst she lived. The respondent appealed an order requiring him to make the payments, saying that as a consolidating Act, the 1925 Act should not be read to change the common law. Held: … Continue reading Beswick v Beswick: HL 29 Jun 1967
F granted T a lease reserving the right to deal with all rights in the property as F wanted. T used the back court and gate for business deliveries but then F granted the freehold to the plaintiff, who in turn denied all right to use the back court or gate as T had been … Continue reading Green v Ashco Horticulturist Ltd: 1966
The court considered a proviso for re-entry that: ‘forfeiture on the bankruptcy of the lessee is considered as a case of breach of condition.’ Held: It was clearly a condition rather than a mere covenant of the original protected tenancy that the tenant should not become a bankrupt and this condition had been broken by … Continue reading Halliard Property Co Ltd v Jack Segal Ltd: 1978
The test under the section was whether it was inequitable to make the order for sale where one of the joint beneficiaries, who in that case were ex-husband and wife, wished to realise their investment in the property. Held: Referring to the statement of principle in in re Mayo, described as ‘a simple uncomplicated case … Continue reading Jones v Challenger: CA 1960
The landlord claimed possession of a dwelling house let on a weekly tenancy, saying the tenant had been convicted of using the premises for an unlawful purpose. The tenant had been convicted of handling stolen goods by receiving them at the premises. He submitted that the section should be interpreted as applying only to convictions … Continue reading Schneiders and Sons Ltd v Abrahams: 1925
The court held that under a mortgage by deposit under seal, a true equitable mortgage – that the expression ‘the mortgaged property’ in section 101 meant the property over which the mortgage deed purported to extend and was not limited to an equitable interest in that property. Judges: Wilberforce J Citations: [1964] Ch 483 Statutes: … Continue reading in Re White Rose Cottage: ChD 1964
The court considered the ability of a tenant to obtain relief from forfeiture for illegal or immoral use where the tenant was not aware of the breach by his sub-tenant until he received the section 146 notice. Where the tenant took prompt action to limit or prevent damage to the landlord’s reputation, relief from forfeiture … Continue reading Glass v Kencakes: 1966
A covenant required the purchasers to erect and maintain a chain link fence. Held: The covenant was a positive personal covenant between the original vendor and the original purchaser and was not a restrictive covenant. The Lands Tribunal declined jurisdiction to vary it under the section. Citations: (1962) 14 PLCR 56 Statutes: Law of Property … Continue reading Blythe Corporation’s Application: 1962
The respondent stayed on in the family home owned by her husband after he had left, and resisted a possession order sought by the chargee. The husband had charged the house as security for his business debts.Lord Wilberforce described the common law characteristics of property, saying: ‘Before a right or an interest can be admitted … Continue reading National Provincial Bank v Ainsworth: HL 13 May 1965
Section 79 of the Law of Property Act (relating to the burden of covenants) achieved no more than the introduction of statutory shorthand into the drafting of covenants. It does does not have the effect of causing covenants to run with the land Lord Upjohn and Lord Wilberforce [1967] 1 AC 50 Law of Property … Continue reading Tophams Ltd v Earl of Sefton: HL 1967
A greenhouse was not an ‘erection’ within section 62(1). Megaw LJ noted that it was customary to move the greenhouse every few years, Megaw LJ [1969] CLY 3040 Law of Property Act 1925 62(1) England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Elitestone Ltd v Morris and Another HL 1-May-1997 The plaintiff acquired land on which … Continue reading H E Dibble v Moore: CA 1969
To defeat a defence of adverse possession, the plaintiff must succeed in an action which itself had been commenced within the twelve year period. A squatter does not succeed to the title that he has disturbed: by sufficiently long adverse possession he obtains a title of his own, but ‘his possession only defeats the rights … Continue reading St Marylebone Property Co Ltd v Fairweather: HL 16 Apr 1962
A lease contained an option to renew. Both the lease and the reversion were assigned for value. The assignee of the lease exercised the option and a new lease and counterpart were engrossed. The tenant executed the counterpart. The assignee of the reversion, a company, sealed the lease, but then sought to avoid granting the … Continue reading Beesly v Hallwood Estates Ltd: 1960
The parties disputed whether good title had been shown when an assent under seal had been used where a conveyance ordinarily should have been used. Held: Good title had been shown. Though the law is concerned with substance rather than form, it would not be consistent with the orderly development of the common law if … Continue reading Re Stirrup’s Contract: 1961
The trustees proposed establishing a new trust in respect of the share of an estate to which an infant beneficiary had a contingent entitlement. A portion of the trust fund would be allocated to the new trust. Held: This was a lawful exercise of the statutory power of advancement. The new trusts must be read … Continue reading In Re Pilkington’s Will Trusts; Pilkington v Inland Revenue Commissioners: HL 8 Oct 1962
The taxpayer made a gift of shares to a trust set up to fund a medical professorship. The shares were in a private company, and an option was given for their repurchase once a certain level of dividends had been attributed to them. He was assessed to substantial surcharges on them on the basis that … Continue reading Vandervell v Inland Revenue Commissioners: HL 24 Nov 1966
Two brothers were in partneship in unequal shares, but acquired a property for use by the business which they held in equal shares. They agreed a parol yearly tenancy between themselves as owners and as partners. After one died his son took over his . .
To defeat a defence of adverse possession, the plaintiff must succeed in an action which itself had been commenced within the twelve year period. A squatter does not succeed to the title that he has disturbed: by sufficiently long adverse possession . .
1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts
The tenant served by recorded delivery a counter-notice. On the day it was first delivered, nobody was available to sign for it. The landlord claimed it was out of date. Held: The statutory fiction was just that. A letter was deemed to be served on the it would have been served in the normal course … Continue reading WX Investments Ltd v Begg: ChD 13 May 2002
LANDLORD AND TENANT – ADMINISTRATION CHARGES – address for service of notice requiring payment of ground rent – tenant’s address known to landlord but not to its successor – whether knowledge of address to be imputed to successor – notice served by post – whether required to be addressed to tenant at subject property – … Continue reading Maureen Ngozi Obi-Ezekpazu v Avon Ground Rents Ltd (Landlord and Tenant – Administration Charges): UTLC 10 May 2022
The tenant had a lease of business premises. The premises were damaged in a terrorist attack, and the landlord served a notice terminating the lease. The lease gave the right to the landlord to determine the lease if the property was incapable of occupation for more than six months. It came to be accepted that … Continue reading Blunden v Frogmore Investments Ltd: CA 30 Apr 2002
The tenant had served a notice to review the rent. The tenent delivered a counter notice personally be posting it through the letter box. The lease provided that the notice was to be served at the last known business address of the landlord. The landlord had informed the tenant’s solicitor, but not the tenant direct … Continue reading Arundel Corporation v Khokher: CA 9 Dec 2003
LANDLORD AND TENANT – SERVICE CHARGES – s196 Law of Property Act 1925 – s 7 Interpretation Act 1978 – service of notices – waiver of invalidity of notices – s20B Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, contents of notices – appeal allowed. Citations: [2017] UKUT 150 (LC) Links: Bailii Statutes: Law of Property Act 1925 … Continue reading London Borough of Southwark v Akhtar Re: 11 and 54 John Kennedy House: UTLC 20 Apr 2017
The rent review notice was sent by recorded delivery, and received and signed for at the demised premises. The lease incorporated the statutory presumption as to service in section 196(4) of the Law of Property Act 1925.
Held: The Court . .
The deadline for giving notice of a rent review to the tenant was 30 June. The notice was posted recorded delivery on 28 June, but it was not received and signed for until 1 July. The issue was whether it was deemed, under section 196(4) of the 1925 . .
The tenant took on a weekly tenancy in 1975 of Wandsworth under an ‘Acceptance of Offer of Accommodation’. The document made no provision for service. The tenant left for America leaving A as a caretaker. Wandsworth ended the tenancy serving a . .
The court discussed the duty of trustees to sell in the absence of unanimity: ‘The trust for sale will prevail, unless all three trustees agree in exercising the power to postpone.’ Judges: Simonds, J Citations: [1943] Ch 302 Statutes: Law of Property Act 1925 30 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Jones v … Continue reading In re Mayo: ChD 1943
The court was asked to pierce the veil of incorporation of a company in the course of ancillary relief proceedings in a divorce. H had failed to co-operate with the court. After a comprehensive review of all the authorities, Munby J said: ‘The common theme running through all the cases in which the court has … Continue reading Ben Hashem v Ali Shayif and Another: FD 22 Sep 2008
The defendants had published remarks on its website about the reliability of the claimant. When sued in defamation, they pleaded fair comment, but that was rejected by the Court of Appeal. Held: The defendants’ appeal succeeded, and the fair comment defence was re-instated. The phrase ‘honest comment’ should now be used to reflect the nature … Continue reading Spiller and Another v Joseph and Others: SC 1 Dec 2010
The applicants had agreed with the planning authority under section 37 of the 1962 Act that part of their land would be used only as a private open space. They later sought planning consent to build a house. The consent was granted on appeal to the Secretary of State. When the authority still refused to … Continue reading Re Martin and Another’s Application: CA 10 May 1988
The plaintiffs claimed large-scale copyright infringement, and obtained Anton Pillar orders. The House considered the existence of the privilege against self-incrimination where the Anton Piller type of order has been made. The Court of Appeal had decided that the court should abstain from making an order ex parte requiring immediate answers to interrogatories or disclosure … Continue reading Rank Film Distributors v Video Information Centre: HL 1 Mar 1981
A common right of grazing which was quantified but not related to the ability of the land to sustain it was capable of existing in gross, and was therefore severable entirely from the land to which it related. The severance was no necessary prejudice to the land. Robert Walker LJ doubted ‘whether it is correct … Continue reading Bettison and Another v Penton and Another: CA 22 Jan 1998
The trust was created in 1948, and provided gifts over, which had now failed. The court considered the construction of the term ‘stautory next of kin’. The possible beneficiaries claimed through being adopted, arguing that at the date of the last beneficary’s death, all impediments to inheritance by adopted children had been removed by statute. … Continue reading Re Erskine 1948 Trust: ChD 29 Mar 2012
The owner of a common appealed a finding that the neighbouring land owner had acquired by prescription a right of way across the common to use a track for commercial vehicles (buses) to get to the property (the bus depot). Held: An easement cannot become a right where the use of the route is illegal … Continue reading Hanning and Others v Top Deck Travel Group Ltd: CA 9 Jun 1993
The claimant advanced funds to the respondent for him to invest in a bank of which the claimant had insider knowledge. In fact the defendant did not invest the funds, the knowledge was incorrect. The defendant however did not return the sums advanced, saying he need not return it because the contract was for an … Continue reading Patel v Mirza: SC 20 Jul 2016
The parties had litigated the sale of land free of restrictive covenants. Held: The rule that a party was entilted to its costs of defending an action under the Act for the discharge of a covenant at least as far as was necessary for it to have been able to establish whether it was proper … Continue reading University of East London Higher Education Corporation v London Borough of Barking and Dagenham and others: ChD 14 Dec 2004
The landlord granted the tenant a licence to make alterations to the property, but imposed conditions on the use to be made of the resulting premises. The tenant objected. Held: The landlord was entitled when granting consent to take into account possible adverse effects on his own business interests and was therefore able to impose … Continue reading Sargeant, and Sargeant v Macepark (Whittlebury) Limited: ChD 8 Jun 2004
The defendant had charged her home to the claimant and fallen into arrears. There was a sub-charge executed on the same day in favour of the Bank of Scotland (BOS) under which the claimant agreed to repay to BOS the amount it owed to them. Held: The sub-charge did not operate to transfer to BOS … Continue reading Credit and Mercantile Plc v Feliciangela Marks: CA 14 May 2004
The parties contracted for the sale and purchase of land with vacant possession. It was subject to a lease which the seller said had been surrendered, and it refused to accept any requisitions of objections. After exchange it appeared that the tenant was bankrupt, and the surrender ineffective in law. Upon discovery of this the … Continue reading Area Estates Ltd v Weir: CA 20 Jul 2010
The court heard an rejected an argument that s56 worked to allow a third party to sue under a covenant to which he had not been party: ‘before he can enforce it he must be a person who falls within the scope and benefit of the covenant according to the true construction of the document … Continue reading White v Bijou Mansions: CA 1938
The court considered a dispute about ownership and confidence in and copyright of of video tapes taken by Princess Diana before her death. Held: The courts have an inherent discretion to refuse to enforce of copyright. When assessing whether the copyright should be enforced the relevant issues would be ones arising from the work itself, … Continue reading Hyde Park Residence Ltd v Yelland, News Group Newspapers Ltd, News International Ltd, Murrell: CA 10 Feb 2000
The claimants appealed an order finding that the defendant had acquired their land by adverse possession. They said that the defendant had asserted in defence to possession proceedings that they were tenants, and that this contradicted an intent to deny the claimants’ title. Held: The appeal failed. A finding by the ECHR that a particular … Continue reading Ofulue and Another v Bossert: CA 29 Jan 2008
The parties had agreed for a lease, and the tenant entered possession, but no formal lease was executed. The tenant stopped paying rent in 1977 or 1984. He now claimed rectification of the registers to show him as proprietor. The landlord argued that as a lease in writing, time ran from the notice to quit. … Continue reading Long v Tower Hamlets London Borough Council: ChD 20 Mar 1996
The creditor had assigned the debt, but without first giving the debtor defendant the necessary notice. A challenge was made to the ability of the assignee to bring the action, saying that the deed of trust appointed to circumvent the reluctance of the original creditors to sue was invalid without such consent since the assignment … Continue reading Barbados Trust Company Ltd v Bank of Zambia and Another: CA 27 Feb 2007
The applicant challenged the exercise of a power of sale under a mortgage, saying that the mortgagee’s purposes included purposes not those under the mortgage. The parties had been involved in an attempted development of a penthouse. Held: The power was validly exercised. Provided the recovery of the sums for which the security was given … Continue reading Meretz Investments Nv and Another v ACP Ltd and others: ChD 30 Jan 2006
The appellants challenged the removal of a restrictive covenant on a neighbour’s house restricting further building on the land to allow further house in the garden. It was in a small close of houses all erected, and the covenant imposed, in 1952. It was in effect part of a building scheme. The tribunal had found … Continue reading Shephard and others v Turner and Another: CA 23 Jan 2006
The tenant appealed against forfeiture of his lease for breach of a qualified covenant against assignment. It was said that the tenant had attempted to hide from the landlord the assignment of the premises to his company or its shared occupation. The judge had found a sharing of occupation. Held: The tenant’s appeal succeeded. The … Continue reading Akici v LR Butlin Ltd: CA 2 Nov 2005
The claimants had sought entry into theirs and their neighbour’s registered land titles of entries to acknowledge their rights of way. The neighbours appealed the finding of a right of way of necessity and by proprietary estoppel, and an order for rectification. Held: The appeal failed. The restriction on rectifying the register contained in section … Continue reading Sommer and Another v Sweet and Another: CA 10 Mar 2005
The respondent argued that the power given to the Lands Tribunal by the section, did not extend to a power to vary a positive covenant. Held: It could not be right to construe the obligation in the lease as a positive obligation rendering the tenant liable to finding himself in breach of covenant in circumstances … Continue reading Blumenthal v The Church Commissioners for England: CA 13 Dec 2004
The claimant had obtained judgment against customers of the defendant, and then freezing orders for the accounts. The defendants inadvertently or negligently allowed sums to be transferred from the accounts. The claimants sought repayment by the bank. Held: The bank was liable. ‘a duty ought to be imposed on the Bank, towards claimants who have … Continue reading Customs and Excise v Barclays Bank Plc: CA 22 Nov 2004
In the course of a long dispute, the defendant’s solicitors had indicated that they would accept service of proceedings. Just before the limitation period expired, the papers were served directly in the client. The defendants solicitors said that this was invalid service, and that later service out of time could not revive the claim. Held: … Continue reading Firstdale Ltd v Quinton: ComC 5 Aug 2004
The proposed landlord had sealed the lease, but the tenant was to seal and deliver his part by a certain date. The respondent purported to complete the lease later. Held: Under the 1985 Act completion would require writing, intention and delivery. Sealing was insufficient. Section 74 of the 1925 Act did not refer to delivery. … Continue reading Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council v Torkington: CA 31 Oct 2003
A right of pre-emption had misdescribed the property when it was registered. The land was transferred without regard to the right of pre-emption. It was found as a fact that no money passed for the transfer, and the claimants said the unregistered right of pre-emption was, under the Act, only void as against a purchaser … Continue reading Merer v Fisher and Another: CA 13 May 2003
House owners had used vehicular access across a common to get to their houses for many years. The commons owner required them to purchase the right, and they replied that they had acquired the right by lost modern grant and/or by prescription. Held: The use of a right of way over a common by vehicles … Continue reading Roland Brandwood and others v Bakewell Management Ltd: CA 30 Jan 2003
The claimants asserted a right to possession of land, and the defendant resisted, claiming a proprietary estoppel. A predecessor had intended to grant a sub-lease to the defendant, who had arranged for his company JAD Ltd to execute major works on the strength of that promise. JAD was given permission to store items there, but … Continue reading Lloyd and others v Dugdale and Another: CA 21 Nov 2001
A covenant on the sale of land for a public house provided that the vendor should not permit the building of licensed premises within half a mile. Held: The covenant operated personally only. The covenants which might be implied by the section to bind successors in title also, could not be implied where the commercial … Continue reading Morrells of Oxford Ltd v Oxford United Football Club Ltd and Others: CA 21 Jul 2000
The plaintiff acquired land on which 27 chalets were erected. They served notice to quit so that the site could be developed. The defendants argued that they had residential tenancies with protection under the Rent Act 1977. Held: The tenants’ appeals succeeded. A built structure becomes part of the land and itself real property, according … Continue reading Elitestone Ltd v Morris and Another: HL 1 May 1997
The bank appealed against a decision that the simple deposit of deeds with a bank did not take effect as an equitable charge. Held: Depositing deeds with a bank is not sufficient to create a charge over them. The old law as to the creation of an equitable mortgage by deposit of deeds had been … Continue reading United Bank of Kuwait Plc v Sahib and Others: CA 2 Feb 1996
The tenant claimed that he had been injured when as the upper portion of a window was being opened one of the cords of the window sash broke and the top part of the window slipped down and caught and injured his hand. The plaintiff admitted that the defect was latent one (of which the … Continue reading Morgan v Liverpool Corporation: CA 1927
The parties were neighbours, with houses adjacent to a right of way. Slabs had been laid next to the houses forming a raised pavement. The respondents had sought to enclose their area of this raised pavement, building a porch. They now appealed an order requiring to remove what had already been built. Held: The pavement … Continue reading Minor v Groves: CA 20 Nov 1997
A right to pasture animals on a common had been levant and couchant, and as such was inalienable as a separate asset from the land where the animals were kept. The right was registered under the Act, and was thereby transformed into a right to graze a certain number of animals on the common. That … Continue reading Bettison and others v Langton and others: HL 17 May 2001
Two brothers had acquired land as joint tenants with the aid of a mortgage. Distinct orders were made against each of them charging their respective interests in the land. The mortgagee assigned the mortgage. The brothers held under a trust for sale. The judgment creditor sought to redeem the mortgage which was opposed by the … Continue reading Irani Finance Ltd v Singh: CA 1970
Land was sold. The parties disputed whether a greenhouse was included. Held: It was a large greenhouse consisting of a sectional frame bolted to a large concrete base. ‘Building’ was to be given the meaning ascribed by s62 of the 1925 Act. The greenhouse was not sufficiently affixed but rested by its own weight on … Continue reading Deen v Andrews: 1986
A lease contained a covenant against assignment without the Landlord’s consent, such consent not to be unreasonably withheld. The tenant asserted, pace Killick, that the landlord could not refuse consent on the grounds that the proposed tenant might not comply with the terms of the lease, and that the building obligation operated as a use … Continue reading Ashworth Frazer Limited v Gloucester City Council: HL 8 Nov 2001
The plaintiff sought rectification of its lease. Held: The court ordered rectfication applying section 63(1): ‘I need not read any further. But [Counsel] submits, I think rightly so, that under that provision the transfer, which was a transfer of the freehold reversion, subject, of course, to the lease, from the original landlords to the present … Continue reading Boots the Chemist Ltd v Street: 1983
If a notice of assignment of a debt describes the assignment by reference to a wrong date, the notice is invalid because it has described a non-existent document. Citations: [1956] 1 WLR 419 Statutes: Law of Property Act 1925 139 Cited by: Cited – Van Lynn Developments Ltd v Pelvis Construction Co Ltd 1969 A … Continue reading W F Harrison and Co v Burke: 1956
A mortgagee may under common law go into possession before the ink is dry on the mortgage unless there is something in the contract, express or by implication, whereby he has contracted himself out of that right. He has the right because he has a legal term of years in the property or its statutory … Continue reading Four-Maids Ltd v Dudley Marshall (Properties) Ltd: 1957
The appellant’s land was to be taken under compulsory purchase by the Council who wished to use it to assist Tesco in the construction of a new supermarket. Tesco promised to help fund restoration of a local listed building. Sainsbury objected an now appealed against the Court of Appeal’s overturning of the orer in its … Continue reading Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Wolverhampton City Council and Another: SC 12 May 2010
The 1938 will of a testator was at issue. He died in 1943. The trusts included a life interest for the testator’s widow and, on her death without issue (which happened in 1971), residue was given to the testator’s three half-siblings ‘or their heirs and surviving issue’. Held: The heirs were to be ascertained in … Continue reading In re Bourke’s Will Trusts: ChD 1980
The plaintiffs contracted to buy a plot of registered land with a house to be built on it. The developer had charged the estate as a whole to a bank to secure the development finance. The developer became insolvent and the bank sold the estate as mortgagee to the first defendant ‘subject to and with … Continue reading Lyus v Prowsa Developments Ltd: ChD 1982
Ex turpi causa explained The parties had disputed the validity a patent and the production of infringing preparations. The english patent had failed and damages were to be awarded, but a Canadian patent remained the defendant now challenged the calculation of damages for what it said would have been an infringing trade, and pleaded ex … Continue reading Les Laboratoires Servier and Another v Apotex Inc and Others: SC 29 Oct 2014
Two partners had covenanted with a retiring partner that on his death they would pay certain annuities to his daughters. The Revenue claimed estate duty. Held: The claim was rejected. The daughters were not parties to the agreement, and had no right to sue for their annuities. Whether they received them or not depended on … Continue reading In re Miller’s Agreement, Uniacke v Attorney-General: ChD 1947
The court discussed the doctrine of privity of contract. Lord Denning MR said: ‘It is often said to be a fundamental principle of our law that only a person who is a party to a contract can sue on it. I wish to assert, as distinctly as I can, that the common law in its … Continue reading Drive Yourself Hire Co (London) Ltd v Strutt: CA 1954
Houses were built next to a common. Over many years the owners had driven over the common. The landowners appealed a decision that they could not acquire a right of way by prescription over the common because such use had been unlawful as a criminal offence under section 193 of the Law of Property Act … Continue reading Bakewell Management Limited v Brandwood and others: HL 1 Apr 2004
The respondent appealed against a finding that the provision which made a loan agreement completely invalid for lack of compliance with the 1974 Act was itself invalid under the Human Rights Act since it deprived the respondent lender of its property rights. It was also argued that it was not possible to make a declaration … Continue reading Wilson v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry; Wilson v First County Trust Ltd (No 2): HL 10 Jul 2003
The tenant had been convicted of permitting the premises in Great Ormond Street to be used for habitual prostitution. The landlord served a notice under section 146 which did not provide for the possibility of the breach being remedied. The evidence showed that the tenant had been knowingly and actively permitting the house to be … Continue reading Rugby School (Governors) v Tannahill: CA 1935
Complex family trusts had been created over many years. Various documents were now disputed, and particularly the extent of land demised by a lease, and whether a surender of a lease had occurred. Landslides had disturbed the boundaries of the land. An arbitrator had decided the new rent on the basis of his own findings … Continue reading Rysaffe Trustee Company (CI) Ltd and Another v Ataghan Ltd and others: ChD 8 Aug 2006
Beneficial Interests, Trusts and Restrictions : SeveranceThe Applicant bought a house together with the Respondent’s mother as joint tenants in 1966, and both lived in separate parts. They were not related nor were they in a relationship. Solicitors acting for Respondent and her mother purportedly sent a notice severing the tenancy in November 1995. This … Continue reading Bacchus v Maduro: LRA 21 Dec 2017
The court rejected an argument that section 56 had altered the law to allow actions by third parties under a contract. Citations: [1959] 2 QB 226 Statutes: Law of Property Act 1925 56 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Beswick v Beswick HL 29-Jun-1967 The deceased had assigned his coal merchant business to … Continue reading Green v Russell: CA 1959
The claimants asserted that they had the benefit of restrictive covenants under a building scheme to prevent the defendants erecting more houses in their neighbouring garden. The defendants pointed to alleged breaches of the same scheme by the claimants. Held: There was not only an intention to create a building scheme but also a clearly … Continue reading Turner and Another v Pryce and others: ChD 9 Jan 2008
Limits to Police Exemption from Liability The claimant, an elderly lady was bowled over and injured when police were chasing a suspect through the streets. As they arrested him they fell over on top of her. She appealed against refusal of her claim in negligence. Held: Her appeal succeeded. It is normally only in a … Continue reading Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police: SC 8 Feb 2018
Claim by a wife that she has a beneficial interest in a house registered in the sole name of her husband and that her interest has priority over the rights of a bank under a legal charge executed without her knowledge. The case raises a point of importance in the law of registered conveyancing. Shortly … Continue reading Lloyds Bank plc v Rosset: CA 13 May 1988
The claimant sub-tenant had been injured entering the block of apartments. He said that the freeholder was responsible despite no report of the disrepair having been made. The lease excused the landlord from unnotified liability. The parties acknowledged that section 11 of the 1985 Act could not be set aside by the contract. Held: The … Continue reading Edwards v Kumarasamy: SC 13 Jul 2016
LRA Rivers, Waterways and Foreshore – Trial of a preliminary issue as to whether the Applicant can establish documentary title to part of the bed and foreshore of the River Thames; the ‘ad medium filum’ rule; true construction of the words ‘in front of or immediately adjacent to’; Port of London Act 1908, sections 1, … Continue reading Port of London Authority v Devere and 7 Others – 0733-0755: LRA 27 Feb 2013
This appeal concerns the question whether an area of land in Bath known as the Recreation Ground, commonly called ‘the Rec’, is still subject to a restrictive covenant imposed in a conveyance of the Rec dated 6 April 1922 (‘the 1922 conveyance’). That turns on the question whether there is anyone who can now claim … Continue reading Bath Rugby Ltd v Greenwood and Others: CA 21 Dec 2021
Benefit of Covenant Ran with Land In 1938, landowners and the Catchment Board agreed that the Board would make good and maintain the banks of a stream, with the landowners contributing to the cost. The agreement was not said to be for the benefit of the landowner’s successors in title. In 1940, the first plaintiff … Continue reading Smith and Snipes Hall Farm Ltd v River Douglas Catchment Board: CA 1949
Land was laid out in individual lots and sold off in a standard form requiring that no building should be erected other than one private dwelling house and that plans should be submitted for approval. The defendants purchased one lot and wished to erect an additional house in contravention of the restriction. The plaintiffs owned … Continue reading Roake and others v Chadha and another: QBD 1984
Covenents Attach to entire land not just parts Conveyances contained restrictive covenants but they were not expressly attached to the land. The issue was whether they were merely personal. Held: Section 78 made the covenant by the purchaser binding on his successors also. The section provides for statutory annexation of any covenant which touches and … Continue reading Federated Homes Ltd v Mill Lodge Properties Ltd: CA 29 Nov 1979
Minor Irregularity in Break Notice Not Fatal Leases contained clauses allowing the tenant to break the lease by serving not less than six months notice to expire on the third anniversary of the commencement date of the term of the lease. The tenant gave notice to determine the leases on 12th January 1995, although the … Continue reading Mannai Investment Co Ltd v Eagle Star Assurance: HL 21 May 1997
