Click the case name for better results:

Pryor, Re 54 Nelmes Way: UTLC 15 Jul 2009

UTLC RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS -discharge or modification -dwellinghouse -covenants not to erect more than one dwellinghouse set back to building line -application to discharge or modify to permit two additional dwellinghouses -one objection -application refused -Law of Property Act 1925, S84(1)(a), (aa), (c). Citations: [2009] UKUT 131 (LC) Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Land Updated: … Continue reading Pryor, Re 54 Nelmes Way: UTLC 15 Jul 2009

London Borough of Southwark v Akhtar Re: 11 and 54 John Kennedy House: UTLC 20 Apr 2017

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

Acts

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

Fitzkriston Llp v Panayi and others: CA 12 Feb 2008

Appeal against order made in landlord and tenant possession proceedings. The tenant said that the judge had approached the case unfairly, and in particular had rejected out of hand the tenants assertion of a document as a lease. Held: The criticisms of the judge had some weight. As to whether the document created a lease: … Continue reading Fitzkriston Llp v Panayi and others: CA 12 Feb 2008

Long v Tower Hamlets London Borough Council: ChD 29 Mar 1996

The landlord’s agents wrote to the proposed tenant offering a quarterly tenancy of the premises. The tenancy was to commence at a future date. The defendant endorsed the letter and returned it to say he would abide by the terms, and he was allowed into possession. He ceased to pay rent, and eventually came to … Continue reading Long v Tower Hamlets London Borough Council: ChD 29 Mar 1996

Ben Hashem v Ali Shayif and Another: FD 22 Sep 2008

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

D’Silva v Lister House Development Ltd: 1970

Even an unlawful sub-tenancy can have protection under Part II of the 1954 Act. The court described as fallacious the submission that section 74(1) does not extend to or answer the question whether the document has ever been delivered, saying: ‘The section says that the document is to be deemed to have been duly executed … Continue reading D’Silva v Lister House Development Ltd: 1970

Southward Housing Co-Operative Ltd v Walker and Another: ChD 8 Jun 2015

The court was asked as to the nature and effect of tenancies for life granted by fully mutual housing co-operatives and in particular how they can lawfully be brought to an end and a possession order obtained. The tenants sought a declaration of incompatibility in respect of section 80. The Co-operative was fully mutual and … Continue reading Southward Housing Co-Operative Ltd v Walker and Another: ChD 8 Jun 2015

Paragon Finance Plc v Pender and Another: CA 27 Jun 2005

The defendants had purchased their property from the local authority with the support of a loan from the claimants. The defendants fell into arrears but now sought to resist possession on the basis that the claimant, in securitising their portfolio of mortgages, had lost the right to possession. The assignments had been left uncompleted. Held: … Continue reading Paragon Finance Plc v Pender and Another: CA 27 Jun 2005

Rudra v Abbey National Plc and Stickley and Kent (Risk Management Unit) Limited: CA 26 Feb 1998

The parties disputed whether a contract had been entered into for the sale of land, and whether new evidence could be entered on an appeal against a strike out. The estate agents had signed a contract as agents for the mortgagee in possession, but the mortgagee said that they has acted outside their agency. Eventually … Continue reading Rudra v Abbey National Plc and Stickley and Kent (Risk Management Unit) Limited: CA 26 Feb 1998

University of East London Higher Education Corporation v London Borough of Barking and Dagenham and others: ChD 9 Dec 2004

The University wanted to sell land for development free of restrictive covenants. It had previously been in the ownership of both the servient and dominant land in respect of a restrictive covenant. The Borough contended that the restrictive covenants remained in effect. The University sought their discharge. Held: The Borough had owned the dominant and … Continue reading University of East London Higher Education Corporation v London Borough of Barking and Dagenham and others: ChD 9 Dec 2004

Blunden v Frogmore Investments Ltd: CA 30 Apr 2002

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

Paul Crompton: LT 7 Apr 2006

Citations: [2006] EWLands LP – 33 – 2005 Links: Bailii Statutes: Law of Property Act 1925 84 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Land, Costs Updated: 18 August 2022; Ref: scu.240454

Forcelux Ltd v Binnie: CA 21 Oct 2009

Forcelux and Mr Binnie were the landlord and tenant of a flat in Lincoln. Under the lease, the tenant was obliged to pay ground rent and other charges. The lease contained a forfeiture provision in the event of non-payment of rent or charges. Mr Binnie fell into arrears and Forcelux obtained a default judgment against … Continue reading Forcelux Ltd v Binnie: CA 21 Oct 2009

Long v Tower Hamlets London Borough Council: ChD 20 Mar 1996

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

Scottish and Newcastle Plc v Lancashire Mortgage Corporation Ltd: CA 5 Jul 2007

The parties each had a charge over a property, and now disputed which had priority. The brewery appealed an order for rectification of the registers to reverse priority on the basis of an estoppel. The charge in their favour had been registered first, but the respondents charge was intended to secure finance to repay it … Continue reading Scottish and Newcastle Plc v Lancashire Mortgage Corporation Ltd: CA 5 Jul 2007

Dobbin: LT 30 Aug 2006

LT RESTRICTIVE COVENANT – modification – building scheme – proposed bungalow – reasonable user – public interest – whether practical benefits secured – substantiality – effect of scheme – application refused – Law of Property Act 1925, s84(1)(aa), (b) and (c) Judges: Trott FRICS Citations: [2006] EWLands LP – 59 – 2004 Links: Bailii Statutes: … Continue reading Dobbin: LT 30 Aug 2006

Barnet London Borough Council; Re: Land at Claremont Road comprising Hendon Football Club and Football Ground: LT 10 Jul 2006

LT RESTRICTIVE COVENANT – entitlement to benefit – preliminary issue – whether covenant impliedly annexed to land – surrounding circumstances – held no entitlement – objectors not admitted.The landowners sought the discharge of a restrictive covenant requiring land to be used as a Public Park or Recreation Ground or meadow. Four hundred locals objected. The … Continue reading Barnet London Borough Council; Re: Land at Claremont Road comprising Hendon Football Club and Football Ground: LT 10 Jul 2006

Sedac Investments Ltd v Tanner and others: ChD 6 May 1982

The court was asked whether the plaintiff lessors were entitled to leave to commence proceedings against the lessee defendants for damages under section 1(2) of the 1938 Act for breach of a repairing covenant, even though the lessors had themselves remedied the breach before purporting to give the lessees a notice such as is specified … Continue reading Sedac Investments Ltd v Tanner and others: ChD 6 May 1982

Kilcarne Holdings Ltd v Targetfollow (Birmingham) Ltd, Targetfollow Group Ltd: ChD 9 Nov 2004

The defendant entered into an agreement for lease, incurring substantial obligations. When it could not meet them it sought assistance from the claimant, who now claimed to have an interest in a joint venture. The draft documentation originally suggested a loan, but then changed. Disagreements persisted after completion. Held: There was insufficient agreement to constitute … Continue reading Kilcarne Holdings Ltd v Targetfollow (Birmingham) Ltd, Targetfollow Group Ltd: ChD 9 Nov 2004

Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council v Torkington: CA 31 Oct 2003

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

City of London Building Society v Flegg And Another: HL 14 May 1987

A couple bought a property and registered it in their own names with substantial financial assistance from the parents of one of them. The parents occupied the house with them. Without telling the parents, the owners borrowed again, executing further charges. Held: The fact of occupation did not add to the parents’ rights as equitable … Continue reading City of London Building Society v Flegg And Another: HL 14 May 1987

Lloyd and others v Dugdale and Another: CA 21 Nov 2001

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

Elitestone Ltd v Morris and Another: HL 1 May 1997

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

Re Sigsworth: Bedford v Bedford: 1935

The court was asked to answer a question on the assumed premise that a woman had been murdered by her son and had died intestate. The question for decision was whether the forfeiture rule prevented the son from benefiting under the intestacy provisions of the 1925 Act. Held: Clauson J said that the forfeiture rule … Continue reading Re Sigsworth: Bedford v Bedford: 1935

Pretoria Warehousing Co Ltd v Shelton: 1993

In a shopping centre, a tenant and its customers had acquired the right under s62 of the 1925 Act to use the concourse. The tenant was therefore entitled to an injunction to prevent the landlord further developing the concourse in such a way as to infringe those rights. Citations: [1993] EGCS 120 Statutes: Landlord and … Continue reading Pretoria Warehousing Co Ltd v Shelton: 1993

Parc (Battersea) Ltd (In Administrative Receivership) and An v Hutchinson: ChD 9 Apr 1999

A tenant of a lease for 14 months, having agreed to exclude his security, granted a sub-tenancy to a business from month to month. The sub-tenant claimed security, but was held only to have taken an assignment of the tenant’s rights and so was not secure. Citations: Times 09-Apr-1999, Gazette 19-May-1999, Gazette 31-Mar-1999 Statutes: Law … Continue reading Parc (Battersea) Ltd (In Administrative Receivership) and An v Hutchinson: ChD 9 Apr 1999

Alexander Devine Children’s Cancer Trust v Housing Solutions Ltd: SC 6 Nov 2020

The correct approach to the ‘public interest’ requirement on an application for the modification or discharge of restrictive covenants under section 84 of the Law of Property Act 1925. Citations: [2020] UKSC 45 Links: Bailii, Bailii Press Summary, Bailii Issues and Facts Statutes: Law of Property Act 1925 84 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Appeal … Continue reading Alexander Devine Children’s Cancer Trust v Housing Solutions Ltd: SC 6 Nov 2020

Abbey National Building Society v Cann: HL 29 Mar 1990

Registered land was bought with an advance from the plaintiff. The transfer and charge were registered one month later, but in the meantime, the buyer’s parents moved in. When the buyer defaulted, his mother resisted possession proceedings, saying that she had an overriding interest through her occupation at the time when the charge was registered. … Continue reading Abbey National Building Society v Cann: HL 29 Mar 1990

Lloyds Bank plc v Rosset: CA 13 May 1988

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

Stodday Land Ltd and Another v Pye: ChD 7 Oct 2016

The agricultural landlord sold part of his land subject to the respondent’s tenancy to the appellant. Before the transfer was registered, notices to quit were served by both the landlord and his buyer. The tenant challenged both notices in the County court, against whose finding and order that the notices were invalid, both defendants now … Continue reading Stodday Land Ltd and Another v Pye: ChD 7 Oct 2016

Paragon Finance Plc (Formerly the National Home Loans Corporation Plc) v Pender and Pender: ChD 25 Nov 2003

Section 114 of the 1925 Act has no application to Registered Land. It provides for a transfer ‘unless a contrary intention is expressed’ in the mortgage. Thus if section 114 applies, all depends upon the true construction of the mortgage. The power under the Civil Procedure Rules to revoke an earlier order included a power … Continue reading Paragon Finance Plc (Formerly the National Home Loans Corporation Plc) v Pender and Pender: ChD 25 Nov 2003

Snook and Another Re: 71 Cherry Tree Road: UTLC 20 Nov 2015

UTLC RESTRICTIVE COVENANT – discharge – modification – restriction to one single dwellinghouse – proposed development of second house in garden – lack of planning permission – grounds (a), (aa), (b) and (c) of s84(1) of Law of Property Act 1925 – application refused [2015] UKUT 623 (LC) Bailii England and Wales Land Updated: 06 … Continue reading Snook and Another Re: 71 Cherry Tree Road: UTLC 20 Nov 2015

JSC BTA Bank v Ablyazov: SC 21 Oct 2015

The court was asked as to the interpretation and application of the standard form freezing order. In the course of long-running litigation between JSC BTA Bank and Mr Ablyazov the Bank had obtained a number of judgments against the respondent amounting in all to US$4.4 billion, none of which had been satisfied. The bank appealed … Continue reading JSC BTA Bank v Ablyazov: SC 21 Oct 2015

Willens v Influential Consultants Ltd: UTLC 7 May 2015

UTLC LANDLORD AND TENANT – Administration Charges – whether legal expenses incurred in contemplation of proceedings under section 146, Law of Property Act 1925 – whether appeal compromised on payment of service charge arrears by third party mortgagee – appeal dismissed [2015] UKUT 362 (LC) Bailii Property Act 1925 146 England and Wales Landlord and … Continue reading Willens v Influential Consultants Ltd: UTLC 7 May 2015

Roberts and Others v Keegan (Rentcharges : Nature and Extent): LRA 1 Oct 2014

LRA A lease created by the owner of a rentcharge pursuant to section 121 of the Law of Property Act 1925 is not registrable as a lease at HM Land Registry but is a mortgage which can only be protected on the register by a notice at least where the rentcharge is to end in … Continue reading Roberts and Others v Keegan (Rentcharges : Nature and Extent): LRA 1 Oct 2014

Birdlip Ltd v Hunter and Another: ChD 24 Mar 2015

The claimant had bought land it wished to develop. The defendant owners of neighbouring land said that they had the benefit of restrictive covenants whch would restrict such development. Behrens HHJ [2015] EWHC 808 (Ch) Bailii Law of Property Act 1925 84(2) England and Wales Citing: See Also – Birdlip Ltd v Hunter and Another … Continue reading Birdlip Ltd v Hunter and Another: ChD 24 Mar 2015

Stafford-Flowers, Re: 182 Brambles Chine Estate: UTLC 3 Mar 2015

UTLC RESTRICTIVE COVENANT – discharge – estate comprising 278 holiday bungalows – occupation restriction on 74 days of the year – applicant seeking discharge to allow all year round occupation and removal of holiday use restriction – obsolescence – practical benefits of substantial value or advantage – public interest – injury – application refused – … Continue reading Stafford-Flowers, Re: 182 Brambles Chine Estate: UTLC 3 Mar 2015

Oughtred v Inland Revenue Commissioners: HL 4 Nov 1959

The taxpayer and her son owned through a trust the entire beneficial interest in the shares of a company. She agreed to transfer other shares to him in return for his interest in the shares subject to the trust, releasing the trust. The Revenue contended that there must be a deed giving effect to the … Continue reading Oughtred v Inland Revenue Commissioners: HL 4 Nov 1959

Wood v United Kingdom: ECHR 2 Jul 1997

(Commission decision as to admissibility) The applicant’s house had been repossessed by a mortgagee when she defaulted on her payments due under the mortgage. Her complaint was found to be manifestly ill-founded, saying ‘In so far as the repossession constituted an interference with the applicant’s home, the Commission finds that this was in accordance with … Continue reading Wood v United Kingdom: ECHR 2 Jul 1997

Cook v The Mortgage Business Plc: CA 24 Jan 2012

The land owners sought relief from possession orders made under mortgages given in equity release schemes: ‘If the purchaser raises all or part of the purchase price on mortgage, and then defaults, the issue arises whether the mortgagee’s right to possession has priority over, or is subject to, any entitlement of the vendor to continue … Continue reading Cook v The Mortgage Business Plc: CA 24 Jan 2012

London Borough of Harrow v Qazi: HL 31 Jul 2003

The applicant had held a joint tenancy of the respondent. His partner gave notice and left, and the property was taken into possession. The claimant claimed restoration of his tenancy saying the order did not respect his right to a private life and home. Held: Article 8 does not, in terms, give a right to … Continue reading London Borough of Harrow v Qazi: HL 31 Jul 2003

ZH and CN, Regina (on The Applications of) v London Boroughs of Newham and Lewisham: SC 12 Nov 2014

The court was asked whether the 1977 Act required a local authorty to obtain a court order before taking possession of interim accommodation it provided to an apparently homeless person while it investigated whether it owed him or her a duty under Part VII of the 1996 Act, and (ii) whether a public authority, which … Continue reading ZH and CN, Regina (on The Applications of) v London Boroughs of Newham and Lewisham: SC 12 Nov 2014

Shaws (EAL) Ltd v Pennycook: CA 2 Feb 2004

Tenant’s First Notice to terminate, stood The landlord served a notice to terminate the business lease. The tenant first served a notice to say that it would not seek a new lease, but then, and still within the time limit, it served a second counter-notice seeking a new tenancy. The landlord sought to rely upon … Continue reading Shaws (EAL) Ltd v Pennycook: CA 2 Feb 2004

Scott v Southern Pacific Mortgages Ltd and Others: SC 22 Oct 2014

The appellant challenged a sale and rent back transaction. He said that the proposed purchaser had misrepresented the transaction to them. The Court was asked s whether the home owners had interests whose priority was protected by virtue of section 29(2)(a)(ii) of, and Schedule 3, paragraph 2, to the Land Registration Act 2002. Held: The … Continue reading Scott v Southern Pacific Mortgages Ltd and Others: SC 22 Oct 2014

Hunter and Others v Canary Wharf Ltd: HL 25 Apr 1997

The claimant, in a representative action complained that the works involved in the erection of the Canary Wharf tower constituted a nuisance in that the works created substantial clouds of dust and the building blocked her TV signals, so as to limit her enjoyment of her land. Held: The interference with TV reception by an … Continue reading Hunter and Others v Canary Wharf Ltd: HL 25 Apr 1997

Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust v Haywood: SC 25 Apr 2018

Notice of dismissal begins when received by worker The court was asked: ‘If an employee is dismissed on written notice posted to his home address, when does the notice period begin to run? Is it when the letter would have been delivered in the ordinary course of post? Or when it was in fact delivered … Continue reading Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust v Haywood: SC 25 Apr 2018

Adamson, Regina (on The Application of) v Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council: CA 18 Feb 2020

Appropriation was not in sufficient form The claimants had challenged an order supporting the decision of the Council to use their allotments for a new primary school, saying that the land had be appropriated as allotment land, and that therefore the consent of the minister was needed. Held: The appeal failed. The use of the … Continue reading Adamson, Regina (on The Application of) v Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council: CA 18 Feb 2020

Hardy and Another v Haselden and Others: CA 29 Nov 2011

The claimants had taken up occupation of a farm under an informal arrangement which they now said amounted to a tenancy for ther lives. The freeholder’s, personal representatives of the original grantors, appealed against a declaration accordingly. The respondents said that they had spent over andpound;30,000 in repairs because of the agreement. Held: The appeal … Continue reading Hardy and Another v Haselden and Others: CA 29 Nov 2011