Links: Home | swarblaw - law discussions

swarb.co.uk - law index


These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases.  














Land - From: 2004 To: 2004

This page lists 133 cases, and was prepared on 02 April 2018.

 
Norfolk County Council v Mason [2004] EWHC B1 (Ch)
12 Jan 2004
ChD

Land

[ Bailii ]
 
Blumenthal, Re Law of Property Act 1925 [2004] EWLands LP_34_2002
14 Jan 2004
LT

Land
LT Section 84(1) of the Law of Property Act 1925 - Jurisdiction - whether covenant negative or positive - Alterations covenant within Section
Law of Property Act 1925 84(1)
[ Bailii ]
 
Forcelux Ltd, Re an Appeal Against A Decision of the Leasehold Valuation Tribunal [2004] EWLands LRX_33_2003
20 Jan 2004
LT

Land
LT Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 s.18 - Law of Property Act 1925 s.146 - Housing Act 1996 ss.81 and 82 - jurisdiction of LVT -- covenant to pay costs in preparing notices under s.146 - Meaning of "service charge" -- landlord's costs of management -- Forcelux v Sweetman not followed
Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 18 - Law of Property Act 1925 146
[ Bailii ]
 
Oxfordshire County Council v Oxford City Council, Catherine Mary Robinson [2004] EWHC 12 (Ch); Times, 30 January 2004; [2004] 2 WLR 1291; [2004] Ch 253
22 Jan 2004
ChD
The Hon Mr Justice Lightman
Land
Land had been registered in part as a common. The council appealed. Held: The rights pre-existing the Act had not been lost. The presumption against retrospectively disapplying vested rights applied, and the application had properly been made. The claimant was entitled to register part only of the area of land original included. An application was not to be defeated by part of the land being inaccessible where for example it was overgrown, or under a pond.
Commons Registration Act 1965 - Commons Registration (New Land) Regulations 1969
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Burrows v Secretary of State for Environment Food and Rural Affairs [2004] EWHC 132 (Admin); Gazette, 05 February 2004
23 Jan 2004
Admn
Andrew Nichol QC J
Land, Local Government
A modification of the definitive map was sought, to widen a footpath and declare it a bridleway. The landowner had erected a notice in 1975 denying any public right of way, but the inspector had thought it of no effect. Held: The declaration in the notice of a 'Private Road' was consistent with whatever rights there were being interpreted by the public as a roadway. The claim failed.
Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 53
[ Bailii ]
 
Longmint Ltd v Marcus [2004] EWLands LRX_25_2003
23 Jan 2004
LT

Land

[ Bailii ]
 
Wealden Land Ltd v Naylor-Perrott and others [2004] EWLands LP_8_2003
28 Jan 2004
LT

Land
LT Restrictive Covenants - Entitlement to benefit - Building Scheme - No evidence of notice of common understanding -- Exclusion of benefit of covenant in later conveyances - Effect on subsequent purchasers - Law of Property Act 1925 S.78 - Costs on Preliminary issue.
[ Bailii ]
 
Fraser and Fraser v Canterbury Diocesan Board of Finance Integrated Services Programme [2004] EWCA Civ 15
28 Jan 2004
CA
Lord Justice Potter Mr Justice Wilson Lady Justice Arden
Land, Trusts
The claimants sought a reversion of land conveyed under the 1841 Act to trustees. The defendants ('DBF') as succesors to the trustees argued that by extending the range of pupils in the school, the trustees acquired a title independent of and adverse to the claimants. Held: The DBF succeeded. The judge had found that the land had been used in breach of trust. the school had ceased to be used solely for the purposes set out in the trust deed. It had come to be used for a new and wider purpose, the provision of a school for all-comers (with no finding that priority was given to qualifying persons). The judge then, inconsistently with his own findings, treated the wider purpose as two separate purposes. Arden LJ: " … the fact that a breach or breaches of trust have occurred does not necessarily mean that the authorised purpose has ceased to be the purpose for which the school is used." but "Nor do I accept the submission that the construction which I place on section 2 makes the trustees' title precarious. It simply means that the trustees must adhere to purposes permitted by the terms of the trust."
School Sites Act 1841 2
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Laporte, Regina (on the Application Of) v London Borough of Newham [2004] EWHC 227 (Admin)
30 Jan 2004
Admn

Housing, Land

[ Bailii ]
 
Joyce and Another, Re Law of Property Act 1925 [2004] EWLands LP_13_2002
3 Feb 2004
LT

Land

[ Bailii ]
 
Yorkshire Water Services Ltd v Coal Authority [2004] EWLands LCA_145_2002
3 Feb 2004
LT

Land
LT Compensation - Mining subsidence - Coal Mining Subsidence Act 1991, ss.9, 13 and 44(2) - Limitation period for making Reference - When obligation to make payment in lieu of works arises - When "expenditure incurred"
Coal Mining Subsidence Act 1991
[ Bailii ]
 
O'Brien Homes Limited v Lane [2004] EWHC 303 (QB)
5 Feb 2004

David Clarke J
Damages, Land
The court at first instance had considered what to award by way of damages for breach of a restrictive covenant and set a sum of £150,000 out of an anticipated proft of £280,000. Held: The calculation of the gross profit might be challenged, but not to such an extent as to suggest that the award was incorrect.
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Fengate Developments (A Partnership) v The Commissioners of Customs and Excise [2004] EWHC 152 (Ch); [2004] STC 772
6 Feb 2004
ChD
The Hon Mr Justice Evans-Lombe
VAT, Land

1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Trailer and Marina (Leven) Limited v The Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, English Nature [2004] EWHC 153 (Admin); Times, 19 February 2004
6 Feb 2004
QBD
The Honourable Mr Justice Ouseley
Land, Human Rights
The claimant owned land which contained a canal. After disuse it had become subject an order declaring it a site of special scientific intrest. The owner complained that this removed his right to develop uses of the land and infringed his human rights. Held: The procedures did allow some development subject to controls. It was not right to view environmental protections as of lesser importance than other social values: "nature conservation interests and SSSIs are an important aspect of what can be seen as social policy." The legislation and arrangemnts for compensation were compliant.
Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 29 30 31 32
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Coles, Re [2004] EWLands LP_02_2003
16 Feb 2004
LT

Land

[ Bailii ]
 
Bride Hall Estates Limited, Openboard Limited v St George North London Limited [2004] EWCA Civ 141; Times, 04 March 2004
18 Feb 2004
CA
Lord Justice Keene Lord Justice Kay Lord Justice Carnwath
Contract, Land
A contract contained an overage clause which would come into effect according to whether car parking spaces were included when calculatiing the average values. Held: The contracts indicated that the parking spaces were to be included. Reference to 'net internal area' within the document at one point indicated that the parking spaces were to be included in other parts of the document.
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Stevens v Bath and North East Somerset District Council [2004] EWLands ACQ_96_2001
23 Feb 2004
LT

Land

[ Bailii ]
 
Oxfordshire County Council v Oxford City Council and Another [2005] EWCA Civ 175; [2006] Ch 43
24 Feb 2004
CA
Carnwath LJ
Land
Application was made to register the 'trap grounds' as a village green. Held: Carnwath LJ: "The 1965 Act created no new legal status, and no new rights or liabilities other than those resulting from the proper interpretation of section 10. Since that section only takes effect in relation to any particular land on registration, there is no legal basis for treating that land as having acquired village green status by virtue of an earlier period of qualifying use. The mere fact that it would at some earlier time have come within the statutory definition is irrelevant if it was not registered as such."
Commons Registration Act 1965 13
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Drury v Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs [2004] EWCA Civ 200; Times, 15 March 2004; Gazette, 25 March 2004; [2004] 1 WLR 1906; [2004] 2 All ER 1056
26 Feb 2004
CA
Lord Justice Ward Lord Justice Mummery And Mr Justice Wilson
Land, Litigation Practice
Trespassers occupied part of the land owned by the claimant. They now appealed agaainst an injunction preventing them unlawfully occupying any part of the claimant's land including areas not previously occupied. Held: It was critical to determine just what land was to be protected by the proposed order. The action was in rem and would protect the land against all-comers. As such a high standard of proof was required. If there was convincing evidence of a real danger of other land being occupied, an order might be given, but such evidence was not available here.
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]

 
 Sykes and Another v Taylor-Rose and Another; CA 27-Feb-2004 - [2004] EWCA Civ 299
 
McAdams Homes Ltd v Robinson and Another [2004] EWCA Civ 214; Gazette, 11 March 2004; [2005] 1 P&CR 520; [2004] 3 EGLR 93
27 Feb 2004
CA
Lord Justice Peter Gibson Lord Justice Neuberger and Sir Martin Nourse
Land
The defendant blocked the line of a sewer. The claimant alleged that it had an easement and sought the cost of building the alternative pipe. The question to be answered was "Where an easement is granted by implication on the sale of a property, which is used for a particular purpose at the time of the conveyance, what are the principles governing the extent to which the easement can still be enjoyed by the owner of that property if he changes its use and/or constructs buildings on it?" Held: "It would only be if the redevelopment of the site represented a radical change in its character and it would lead to a substantial increase in the burden, that the dominant owner's right to enjoy the easement of passage of water through the Pipe would be suspended or lost. " The case law is not consistent. The works of construction entitled the judge to reach his conclusion. A court is not in law, limited to considering the actual extent of the enjoyment of the easement by the dominant land at the time of the creation or grant of the easement. Though the court doubted the judge's conclusion that th alteration would lead to a substantial increase in use, his decision was not so wrong as to allow interference.
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Burnett's Trustee v Grainger and Another 2004 SCLR 433; 2004 SC (HL) 19; 2004 SLT 513; 2004 GWD 9-211; [2004] UKHL 8; Times, 08 March 2004; [2004] 11 EGCS 139
4 Mar 2004
HL
Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry
Land
A flat was sold, but before the purchasers registered the transfer, the seller was sequestrated, and his trustee registered his interest as trustee. The buyer complained that the trustee was unjustly enriched. Held: The Act defined the estate of the person sequestrated, and vested those assets in his trustee for the benefit of the sequestrator. The purchaser who failed to register his interest lost it. "In the present case the respondent has done nothing more than take advantage of the mistake or error of his rivals, the appellants, in failing to get off their mark and record the disposition from Mrs Burnett promptly. Even once their agents had become aware that her estate had been sequestrated and that the respondent had been appointed as permanent trustee, for whatever reason, they failed to act. In retrospect at least, that was a mistake, since it allowed the respondent to record his notice of title before the appellants. As the authorities show, even although the respondent was well aware that the appellants held a disposition from Mrs Burnett, he was fully entitled to take advantage of their mistake by recording the notice of title and so completing the diligence by acquiring the real right in the subjects for the creditors."
Bankruptcy (Scotland) Act 1985 31(1) - Abolition of Feudal Tenure etc (Scotland) Act 2000 - Conveyancing (Scotland) Act 1924 5
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ House of Lords ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Ryde International Plc v London Regional Transport [2004] EWCA Civ 232; Gazette, 25 March 2004
5 Mar 2004
CA
Lord Justice Mance Vice-Chancellor, The Vice-Chancellor Lord Justice Carnwath
Land, Damages
The landowner had developed land which was then made the subject of compulsory purchase. The court was asked how the compensation was to be calculated. The landowner expected to sell the development as a whole. The respondent argued that the profit which a purchaser would build into that purchase should affect the compensation. Held: The land was to be valued as a single whole. It was to be calculated as a disturbance loss under 5(6) rather than 5(2).
Land Compensation Act 1961 5(2) 5(6)
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Pleming v Hampton and Another [2004] EWCA Civ 446
12 Mar 2004
CA

Land

[ Bailii ]
 
Cheltenham and Gloucester Plc v Appleyard and Another Times, 29 March 2004; [2004] EWCA Civ 291; Gazette, 01 April 2004
15 Mar 2004
CA
Lord Justice Kennedy, Lord Phillips Of Worth Matravers, Mr Lord Justice Neuberger
Banking, Land
The owners had purchased their property with a loan from the BBBS. A charge was then given to BCCI, which charge said no further charge could be registered without BCCI 's consent. The C&G agreed to lend a sum to refinance the entire borrowings, but on the day it was to be completed, provisional liquidators to BCCI were appointed, who refused to acknowledge the discharge of their charge, and the C&G charge could only have protection as an equitable charge. BCCI acknowledged that they had received the sums due, and so had BBBS. Held: Even though the C&G had received some reduced security, they were entitled to be subrogated to the first chargees whose loan was repaid by their funds. Subrogation was a private remedy intended to avoid unjust enrichment.
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Allen v George and Another [2004] EWCA Civ 396
16 Mar 2004
CA

Land
Right of way dispute
[ Bailii ]
 
Oades and Another v Eke [2004] EWLands RA_17_2003
22 Mar 2004
LT

Land

[ Bailii ]
 
Roger Michael and others v Douglas Henry Miller and Another [2004] EWCA Civ 282; Times, 30 March 2004
22 Mar 2004
ChD
Lord Justice Auld Lord Justice Parker Lord Justice Scott Baker
Land
Property had been sold by the respondents as mortgagees in possession. The claimants said the judge had failed to award the value of the property as found to be valued, and had not given a proper value to a crop of lavender. Held: In exercising his power of sale a mortgagee is under a general duty to take reasonable care to obtain the best price reasonably obtainable at the time and ‘the best price reasonably obtainable’ is synonymous with ‘a proper price’ . "What is proper advertisement will depend on the circumstances of the case." In this case the method of advertisement was the best available in difficult circumstances.The issue of valuing the lavender should be resolved by mediation. Appeal dismissed.
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Ernst Kastner v Marc Jason, Davis Sherman, Brigitte Shermanand David Sherman, Brigitte Sherman-And-Ernst Kastner [2004] EWHC 592 Ch; Times, 26 April 2004
23 Mar 2004
ChD
The Hon Mr Justice Lightman
Arbitration, Land
The parties had a dispute arbitrated by the Beth Din, who ordered the sale of a property. In apparent breach of that order the owner purported to sell the property. The claimant had registered a caution which the defendants now sought to be vacated. Held: Provisional awards by arbitrators were not directly enforceable unless the parties agreed otherwise, and such an agreement was found here. However, the parties had not agreed that the award should create any proprietary interest in or charge against the property.
Arbitration Act 1996 39(1) 48
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Nweze and Another v Nwoko [2004] EWCA Civ 379; Times, 06 May 2004; [2004] 2 P&CR 33
29 Mar 2004
CA
Lord Justice Waller, Lord Justice Sedley And Lord Justice Carnwath
Land, Contract
The parties had settled their dispute in an oral compromise agreement under which it was agreed that land would be sold at the best price reasonably obtainable. One now argued this was unenforceable as an agreement for the disposal of land requiring writing. Held: The agreement could be enforced. Section 2 concerns a contract between seller and purchaser of a plot of land. That did not apply here to the settlement of a dispute.
Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 2
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Seeckts v Paul Derwent Janet Derwent [2004] EWCA Civ 393
30 Mar 2004
CA
Lord Justice Waller Lord Justice Carnwath
Land

[ Bailii ]
 
The City and County of Swansea v Griffiths, Jones [2004] EWCA Civ 398
31 Mar 2004
CA
The Hon Mr Justice Latham Lord Justice Waller Lord Justice Neuberger
Land
Compulsory purchase compensation
[ Bailii ]

 
 Bakewell Management Limited v Brandwood and others; HL 1-Apr-2004 - [2004] UKHL 14; Times, 02 April 2004; [2004] 2 WLR 955; [2004] 2 P & CR DG6; [2004] 15 EGCS 104; [2004] 2 All ER 305; [2004] RTR 26; [2004] 20 EG 168; [2004] 2 AC 519; [2004] NPC 53
 
Collier v Kramer [2004] EWCA Civ 467
1 Apr 2004
CA

Land, Trusts

1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Crest Nicholson Residential (South) Ltd v McAllister [2004] EWCA Civ 410; Times, 06 May 2004; [2004] 1 WLR 2409; [2004] 2 All ER 991; [2004] 2 P & CR 486
1 Apr 2004
CA
Lord Justice Auld Lord Justice Chadwick And Lady Justice Arden
Land
Land had been purchased which was subject to a restrictive covenant. The papers did not disclose the precise extent of the dominant land, the land which benefitted from the restriction. Held: The land having the benefit of a covenant had to be easily ascertainable. It would be oppressive to expect a purchaser of land to establish the facts himself. Those drafting such covenants should bear in mind the probable need for the covenant to be examined many years later. A restrictive covenant affecting land will not be enforceable in equity against a purchaser who acquires a legal estate for value without notice of the covenant. A restrictive covenant imposed in an instrument made after 1925 is registrable as a land charge. If the title is registered, protection is effected by entering notice of the restrictive covenant on the register. In this case the land no longer had the benefit of the covenant, it had not been annexed or assigned.
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Snook v Somerset County Council [2004] EWLands ACQ_219_2000
2 Apr 2004
LT

Land

1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Inglorest Investments Ltd v Robert Campbell and Another [2004] EWCA Civ 408
2 Apr 2004
CA
Lord Justice Mummery Sir Martin Nourse Lord Justice Kay
Land, Trusts
The appellants appealed an order that property be part of the estate of the deceased. There had been an agreement to assign the reversion of the lease to the claimant. That was not completed, but he later acquired the freehold reversion. No written agreement existed, and the claimant asserted a right based upon part performance. Held: The claimant sought to assert both that it the freehold was held on trust for it and that there was a contract. He could not plead both. There was neither an enforceable contract for the sale of the freehold to Inglorest nor a resulting trust in its favour.
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Severn Trent Water Ltd v Coal Authority [2004] EWLands LCA_38_1999
14 Apr 2004
LT

Land

[ Bailii ]
 
Day and Another, Re an Appeal From A Decision of the Leasehold Valuation Tribunal for the London Rent Assessment Panel [2004] EWLands LRA_28_2003
19 Apr 2004
LT

Land

[ Bailii ]
 
Puttock v London Borough of Bexley [2004] EWLands ACQ_101_2003
19 Apr 2004
LT

Land

[ Bailii ]
 
Hotchkin v Mcdonald and others [2004] EWCA Civ 519
20 Apr 2004
CA

Land
Extent of right of way
[ Bailii ]
 
National Westminster Bank Plc, Malhan Malhan v Malhan, The Secretary of State for Consitutional Affairs and Lord Chancellor [2004] EWHC 847 (Ch)
22 Apr 2004
ChD
Vice-Chancellor, The Vice-Chancellor
Land, Human Rights, Banking

Law of Property Act 1925 2(1)
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]

 
 Waters and others v Welsh Development Agency; HL 29-Apr-2004 - [2004] UKHL 19; Times, 05 May 2004; Gazette, 13 May 2004; [2004] 1 WLR 1304; [2004] NPC 68; [2004] RVR 153; [2004] 19 EGCS 165; [2004] 2 All ER 915

 
 National Westminster Bank plc v Patel and another; QBD 1-May-2004 - [2004] All ER (D) 429

 
 Oxley v Hiscock; CA 6-May-2004 - [2004] EWCA Civ 546; Times, 14 July 2004; [2004] 2 FLR 669; [2005] Fam 211
 
Faraday v Carmarthenshire County Council [2004] EWCA Civ 649
10 May 2004
CA

Land, Damages
The claimant appealed against an award of compensation on the compulsory acquisition of his land by the defendant. Held: The award was incorrect. The authority had wrongly deducted a sum in respect of 'freed up time' - which would have allowed the claimant to earn money elsewhere.
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Jerome v Kelly (Her Majesty's Inspector of Taxes) [2004] UKHL 25; Times, 20 May 2004; [2004] 21 EGCS 151; [2004] STI 1201; [2004] 2 All ER 835; [2004] 1 WLR 1409; [2004] NPC 75; [2004] WTLR 681; [2004] STC 887; 76 TC 147; [2004] BTC 176
13 May 2004
HL
Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Scott of Foscote, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood
Capital Gains Tax, Trusts, Land
In 1987, trustees holding land for various beneficiaries in undivided shares entered into a contract to sell it to a purchaser. In 1989 Mr and Mrs Jerome, who were absolutely entitled to interests in the land, assigned part of their beneficial interests (subject to the contract) to the trustees of two Bermuda settlements. By three conveyances in 1990-1992, the original trustees completed the contract of sale. The revenue claimed that the disposal was made at the time of the contract; the taxpayer argued for the time of the conveyances. Held: The section did not provide a clear answer for this situation. The section was intended to fix the time of disposal. It was not intended to impose a liability to tax upon a person who would not be treated as having made a disposal under the carefully constructed scheme for taxing the disposals of assets held on trust, particularly where this might lead to a double charge to tax.
Lord Walker said that "beneficial ownership of the land is in a sense split between the seller and buyer on the provisional assumptions that specific performance is available and that the contract will in due course be completed . . "
Capital Gains Tax Act 1979 46 58
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ House of Lords ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Severn Trent Water Ltd v Barnes [2004] EWCA Civ 570; [2004] 2 EGLR 95; [2004] 26 EG 194; [2005] RVR 181
13 May 2004
CA
Lord Justice Potter Lord Justice Jonathan Parker And Sir Swinton Thomas
Utilities, Land, Damages
The water company appealed an award of damages after it had been found to have laid a water main under the claimant's land without his knowledge or consent. The court had awarded restitutionary damages. Held: The judge fell into error in awarding the exercise the judge sought to perform by awarding the additional sum of £1560 was to compensate for the financial advantage to Severn Trent of using the main without having paid an appropriate sum by way of compensation during a period of 3 years up to the time (July 1995) when the judge considered that the matter would have been settled had Mr Barnes been properly advised. He had no right to an account of profits as well as a sum to compensate him for his loss. Award reduced accordingly.
Potter LJ said: "It is of course the position that in cases of trespass of this kind there is no right to a share in, or account of, profits in any conventional sense. The only relevance of the defendant's profits is that they are likely to be a helpful reference point for the court when seeking to fix upon a fair price for a notional licence."
Water Industry Act 1991 159
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
PT Royal Bali Leisure and Another v Hutchinson and Co Trust Company Ltd [2004] EWHC 1014 (Ch)
13 May 2004
ChD
David Richards J
Trusts, Land

[ Bailii ]
 
Credit and Mercantile Plc v Feliciangela Marks [2004] EWCA Civ 568; Times, 27 May 2004; Gazette, 03 June 2004; [2004] 3 WLR 489; [2005] Ch 81
14 May 2004
CA
Lord Justice Clarke Lord Justice Dyson Lord Justice Wall
Land
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 all the claimant's rights under its own charge, or particularly the right to recover possession. The sub-chargee's rights arose only after it had itself made a formal demand for repayment. Though there was some authority for the defence asserted, there was no general proposition to that effect. The respondent had a right of possession under the facility letter and the principal charge. The mere existence of a sub-charge does not divest a principal chargee of such a right. Although it is possible for a sub-charge to have such an effect, this sub-charge did not have that effect.
Law of Property Act 1925 114(1)
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Samuel v Jarrah Timber and Wood Paving Corporation Ltd [1904] AC 323; [1904] UKHL 2
16 May 2004
HL
Earl of Halsbury, Lord Chancellor, Lord Macnaghten and Lord Lindley
Equity, Land
The appellant loaned £5000 to the respondent taking security of a £30,000 mortgage debenture stock which would allow him to purchase any part of the stock at 40 per cent within twelve months. The company sought to repay the advance within the period of twelve months, whereupon the appellant claimed to purchase the whole of the stock at the agreed price. The company brought a redemption action, seeking a declaration that the option was void. Held: The appeal failed. The company was entitled to the declaration. Lord Halsbury and Lord Macnaghten reached that conclusion with reluctance. If a court determined that a transaction was truly a mortgage, a court will strike down any term of the loan which prevents the mortgagor from getting back the property secured on repaying what was due to the mortgagee. A mortgage may not contain a clause that conferred on the mortgagee an option to buy the mortgaged property.
Lord Lindley said that the doctrine "Once a mortgage, always a mortgage" was not confined to deeds creating legal mortgages; it applied to all mortgage transactions, and: "The doctrine . . means that no contract between a mortgagor and a mortgagee made at the time of the mortgage and as part of the mortgage transaction, or, in other words, as one of the terms of the loan, can be valid if it prevents the mortgagor from getting back his property on paying off what is due on his security. Any bargain which has that effect is invalid, and is inconsistent with the transaction being a mortgage. This principle is fatal to the appellant's contention if the transaction under consideration is a mortgage transaction, as I am of opinion it clearly is."
[ Bailii ]
 
Barlow v Essex County Council [2004] EWLands ACQ_59_2003
18 May 2004
LT

Land

[ Bailii ]
 
Kwik Save Stores Ltd v Stockton on Tees Borough Council [2004] EWLands ACQ_132_2002
18 May 2004
LT

Land

[ Bailii ]
 
Pt Royal Bali Leisure, Pt Jazhirah Pemasaran Internasional Trading As Peninsula Marketing International v Hutchinson and Co Trust Company Ltd [2004] EWHC 1014 (Ch)
18 May 2004
ChD
Mr Justice Richards
Trusts, Land
Timeshare arrangements

 
Cadogan Holdings Ltd v Pockney and Another [2004] EWLands LRA_27_2003
19 May 2004
LT

Land

[ Bailii ]
 
Nelson v Greening and Sykes (Builders) Ltd. [2004] EWCA Civ 791
20 May 2004
CA

Land, Contract

[ Bailii ]
 
Vale v Armstrong, Armstrong [2004] EWHC 1160 (Ch)
21 May 2004
ChD
Mr. Justice Evans-Lombe
Land, Undue Influence, Agency
The claimant sought to set aside a transfer of his house to the defendants made at an undervalue and under an enduring power of attorney, who had charged it to raise money for their business. He had received independent advice. Held: The transaction was disadvantageous to the claimant and there was therefore a presumption of undue influence. However there was also evidence of independent advice etc to rebut that presumption, but "it by no means follows that prior legal advice rebuts the presumption."
The independent advice had failed to bring home the true disadvantages of the transaction to the claimant. The defendant failed to rebut the presumption, and it was set aside.
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]

 
 Connors v The United Kingdom; ECHR 27-May-2004 - 66746/01; [2004] HLR 52; Times, 10 June 2004; [2004] ECHR 223; (2004) 40 EHRR 189; [2004] 40 EHRR 9
 
Regina on the Application of Fisher v English Nature [2004] EWCA Civ 663; Times, 04 June 2004
27 May 2004
CA
Lord Justice Auld Mr Justice Pumfrey Lord Justice Wall
Land, Environment
The claimants appealed a refusal of their request for a judicial review of a decision of the respondent to designate their land as being of special scientific interest because of the need to protect the stone curlew. Held: The defendant's policy toward the land had changed in 2000. It was a decision of a specialist body, and therefore the court could interfere only on limited grounds. The defendant had not taken into account immaterial matters, and the claimants had not ever explained how the defendants could have reached any other decision in the light of the material placed before them. The judge had criticised the claimants for not challenging the policy at first, but that was wrong. The claimants would then have been told their action was premature. The power in the defendant not to confirm an order would have to be exercised in the light of a genuine open-minded consultation and investigation. It had been so exercised. The decision did not infringe the clamants' human rights.
Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 52 - The Conservation (Natural Habitats &c) Regulations 1994 (SI 1194/2716)
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Standard Commercial Property Securities Limited Standard Commercial Property Developments Limited v Glasgow City Council Atlas Investments Limited for Judicial Review of Decisions of Glasgow City Counil [2004] ScotCS 129
1 Jun 2004
OHCS
Lady Paton
Scotland, Planning, Land

Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 191
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ ScotC ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Swift v Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council [2004] EWLands ACQ_22_2002
7 Jun 2004
LT

Land

[ Bailii ]
 
Fairclough Homes Ltd, Re [2004] EWLands LP_30_2001; LP/30/2001
8 Jun 2004
LT
George Bartlett QC
Land, Damages
Application was made to vary a restrictive covenant: " . . how the character of the area and the amenities would be affected by the modification of the restriction is not in my view to be judged by envisaging the worst that could be done without breaching the restriction and comparing it with what the proposed modification is intended to permit . . In such a case as this, the provision, it seems to me, operates in this way. By preventing development that would have an adverse affect on the persons entitled to his benefit, the restriction may be said to secure practical benefits to them but if other developments having adverse affects could be carried out without breaching the covenant, these practical benefits may not be of substantial value or advantage. Whether they are of substantial value or advantage is likely to depend on the degree of probability of such other development being carried out and how bad, in comparison to the appellant's scheme, the effects of that development would be."
Law of Property Act 1925 84
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Macklin and others v Dowsett [2004] EWCA Civ 904
14 Jun 2004
CA

Land, Contract

[ Bailii ]
 
Portsmouth City Football Club Ltd v Sellar Properties (Portsmouth) Ltd [2004] EWCA Civ 760
18 Jun 2004
CA

Land, Contract

[ Bailii ]
 
Humphreys v Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council Unreported, 18 June 2004
18 Jun 2004
Admn
Judge Howarth
Land
Acts of grazing and fertilising by the owner which would have contravened the 1857 and 1876 Acts if the land had been a village green at the time, prevented the land from satisfying the section 22 definition.
Commons Registration Act 1965
1 Citers


 
Humphries v Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council Unreported, 18 June 2004
18 Jun 2004

Howarth J
Land
An application was made under section 14 of the 1965 Act. Held: The Town or Village Green registration was not justified. There was no evidence that rectification would be in any way unjust to the residents of Castleton, but a refusal to rectify would force economic loss on the landowners (who would otherwise be able to develop the land) without any possibility of compensation.
Commons Registration Act 1965 14
1 Citers



 
 Todd, Bradley v The Secretary of State for Environment Food and Rural Affairs; Admn 22-Jun-2004 - [2004] EWHC 1450 (Admin); Times, 06 July 2004; [2004] 1 WLR 2471; [2005] 2 PLR 1; [2004] 4 All ER 497
 
Bridgestart Properties Ltd v London Underground Ltd [2004] EWCA Civ 793
24 Jun 2004
CA

Land, Damages, Limitation
Defence of limitation in claim for injurious affection after compulsory purchase.
[ Bailii ]
 
Yorkshire Bank Plc v Tinsley [2004] EWCA Civ 816; Times, 12 August 2004; [2004] 3 All ER 463; [2004] 1 WLR 2380
25 Jun 2004
CA
Lord Justice Peter Gibson Lord Justice Rix Lord Justice Longmore
Land, Undue Influence
The defendant's husband had charged the matrimonial home on several occasions to the claimant. It was found that the first charges were affected by undue influence and could not be enforced. The defendant argued that the last charge which replaced the earlier ones inherited that defect. Held: The last mortgage was inseparably connected with the earlier mortgages and there was nothing to render the past abuse, which amounted to undue influence, and of which the Bank had constructive notice, inoperative in connection with the last mortgage. As a result, the mere fact that there was no new and additional inequity in relation to the 1994 mortgage was not determinative, for the inequity of the earlier transactions had not been cured.
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Sweet and Another v Sommer and Another Times, 25 August 2004; [2004] EWHC 1504 (Ch)
25 Jun 2004
ChD
Hart J
Land
Part of land had been sold off. By oversight no right of way had been taken in favour of the retained land. The dominant owner argued that by demolition of a building a means of access could be found and that therefore no right of way by necessity arose. Held: It was clearly envisaged by all parties that the building was not to be demolished. Ther was no direct authority on the issue, but the doctrine of necessity had to be read in the context of the actual situation. An implied reservation of the right of way existed.
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Price and others v Caerphilly County Borough Council [2004] EWLands LCA_43_2003
28 Jun 2004
LT

Land

[ Bailii ]

 
 Martin v David Wilson Homes Ltd; CA 28-Jun-2004 - [2004] EWCA Civ 1027; [2004] EGLR 77; A3/2004/0881
 
Generay Ltd v Containerised Storage Company Ltd [2004] EWCA Civ 896
30 Jun 2004
CA

Limitation, Land
adverse possession
[ Bailii ]
 
Jarvis Homes Ltd v Marshall and Another [2004] EWCA Civ 839; [2004] 3 EGLR 81
6 Jul 2004
CA
Thorpe LJ, Rix LJ, neuberger LJ
Land
An intended new road was going to be the access way for 12 new houses. Part of a restrictive covenant provided that the covenantors and their successors would not 'use or permit or suffer to be used the land hereby conveyed or any part thereof or any building or erection now or at any time hereafter erected thereon for any trade business or manufacture but will use the same as a private residence only.' Held: The words 'the same' referred not just to any building on the land but to the whole composite noun clause, meaning the land and all parts of it as well as any building on it. So construed, the covenant operated to prohibit the use of the land as the access way to another part of the development on adjoining land. A dwellinghouse is a narrower concept than residence.
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Withers v Dalling [2004] EWLands RA_14_2003
13 Jul 2004
LT

Land

[ Bailii ]
 
Whitmey, Regina (on the Application of) v the Commons Commissioners [2004] EWCA Civ 951; Times, 10 August 2004
21 Jul 2004
CA

Land, Human Rights
The applicant sought to leave to appeal against refusal of his challenge to the registration of land as a green. Held: The 1965 Act did not limit the registration of greens to those which were registered by 3 January 1970. The Commons Commissioners have no jurisdiction in a dispute arising under section 13. The 1969 Regulations clearly required anyone adversely affect to be heard, and they were Human Rights compliant. The registration authority made decisions which did affect landowners, but it had power to hold an inquiry. Leave to appeal refused.
Commons Registration Act 1965 13 - Commons Registration (New Land) Regulations 1969 6
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Westminster City Council v Ocean Leisure Limited [2004] EWCA Civ 970; Times, 02 September 2004
21 Jul 2004
CA
Potter, Lord Justice Potter Lord Justice Rix Lord Justice Carnwath
Land, Damages
The claimant company owned property next to land which had been acquired to build a new bridge across the Thames. It sought compensation for disturbance to its business from the works. Held: The state of the law was complicated and unsatisfactory. Compensation was in fact payable, though by a circuitous route. There was no special rule applying to hoardings, and the claim succeded. The statutory power given to the local authority necessarily carried also a responsibility toward neighbouring land owners.
Compulsory Purchase Act 1965 10
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Lewis and others v Cottrill [2004] EWCA Civ 1245
22 Jul 2004
CA

Land
Boundary dispute
[ Bailii ]
 
Godmanchester Town Council, Dr Leslie Ernest Drain v Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Cambridgeshire County Council, Yattendon Estates Limited [2004] EWHC 1217 (Admin)
22 Jul 2004
QBD
Mr Justice Richards Kay, Lord Justice Kay
Land
Modification of right of way
Highways Act 1980 31(1)
[ Bailii ]

 
 Regina (on the Application of P Richards and G Richards) v Pembrokeshire County Council; CA 29-Jul-2004 - [2004] EWCA Civ 1000
 
Right Honourable Charles Gerald John Earl Cadogan v Management Company Ltd [2004] EWLands LRA_29_2003
30 Jul 2004
LT

Land

[ Bailii ]
 
Pringle v Murray and others [2004] ScotCS 193
30 Jul 2004
ScS

Land

Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973
[ Bailii ]
 
London Borough of Barnet v Barnet Football Club Holdings Ltd [2004] EWCA Civ 1191
30 Jul 2004
CA
Peter Gibson, Keene, Mauric Kay LJJ
Land, Contract
An application was made for the rectification of a transfer. Held: The fact that the contract has been negotiated by a person who is not the decision-taker and has made an error is irrelevant unless it can be shown that the decision-taker shared the intention of the negotiator; but that requires evidence. The negotiator for the Borough had made an error in the drafting of the contract, but he was not the decision-taker; those who took the decision for the Borough were not called to give evidence and it could not be inferred that they intended the Borough to contract other than in the form of the contract which the Borough executed.
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
McMullan v Murray and others [2004] ScotCS 192
30 Jul 2004
ScS

Land

Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973
[ Bailii ]
 
Nationwide Building Society v Walter D Allan Ltd [2004] ScotCS 198; 2004 GWD 25-539
4 Aug 2004
ScS
Lady Smith
Scotland, Land
Lady Smith said that she could not conclude that Scots law recognises, in principle, a servitude right of parking independent of any right of access.
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ]
 
Boulton and Another, Re Law of Property Act 1925 [2004] EWLands LP_31_2003
4 Aug 2004
LT

Land

[ Bailii ]
 
Nomad Developments Ltd v Gateshead Borough Council [2004] EWLands ACQ_94_2002
6 Aug 2004
LT

Land

[ Bailii ]

 
 Land and Property Ltd v Restormel Borough Council; LT 9-Aug-2004 - [2004] EWLands LCA_47_2002
 
Cohen v Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council [2004] EWLands ACQ_123_2001
27 Aug 2004
LT

Land

[ Bailii ]
 
GLN (Copenhagen) Southern Ltd v Tunbridge Wells Borough Council [2004] EWCA Civ 1279
27 Aug 2004
CA
Lord Justice Keene. Lord Justice Wall, Lord Justice Neuberger
Land
Neighbouring plots included covenants to use and not to use the land as cinemas. A proposed development would have used the land which had to be so used as an access for the new cinema proposed. The claimant sought to rely upon the Act to enforce a restrictive covenant. Held: There was nothing in the contention that the use of the Property for the purpose of connecting up the Cinema for the purpose of services would constitute a breach of the clause. The services are provided for the benefit of the building and not for the benefit of the particular use.
Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Gordon v Harry [2004] EWCA Civ 1226
8 Sep 2004
CA

Land, Trusts

[ Bailii ]
 
Scouts Association Trust Corporation and others v Secretary of State for the Environment [2004] EWLands ACQ_56_2002
10 Sep 2004
LT

Land

[ Bailii ]
 
Secretary of State for Transport, Re A Notice of Reference [2004] EWLands ACQ_125_2003
13 Sep 2004
LT

Land

[ Bailii ]
 
Duncan and Another v Epping Forest District Council [2004] EWLands LCA_62_2003
20 Sep 2004
LT

Land

[ Bailii ]
 
George Wimpey UK Ltd, Regina (on the Application of) v First Secretary of State and Another [2004] EWHC 2419 (Admin)
22 Sep 2004
Admn
Ouseley J
Planning, Land

1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Barca v Mears [2004] EWHC 2170 (Ch)
24 Sep 2004
ChD
Nicholas Stauss QC J
Land
The defendant appealed against an order requiring him to give possession of a house comprised in an estate.
[ Bailii ]

 
 Persimmon Homes (Wales) Ltd and Another v County Borough Council; LT 28-Sep-2004 - [2004] EWLands ACQ_40_2002
 
Coles and Another, Re Law of Property Act 1925 [2004] EWLands LP_2_2003
4 Oct 2004
LT

Land

[ Bailii ]
 
Baksh General Wholesalers Limited v Republic Bank Limited [2004] UKPC 46
6 Oct 2004
PC
Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Clyde, Lord Scott of Foscote, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe
Banking, Land, Commonwealth
(Trinidad and Tobago)
PC Trinidad and Tobago
[ Bailii ] - [ PC ]
 
Terry, Regina (on the Application of) v Tower Hamlets [2004] EWHC 3402 (Admin)
6 Oct 2004
Admn

Local Government, Land

[ Bailii ]
 
George Perlman v Paul Rayden, Claire Rayden [2004] EWHC 2192 (Ch)
7 Oct 2004
ChD
The Honourable Mr Justice Patten
Land, Damages
The parties had become embroiled in a particularly bitter boundary dispute. The claimants in particular sought aggravated damages saying that the defendants had misled them in securing agreement to works. Held: Aggravated damages were awarded. The defendant had continued to deny any wrongdoing when he knew full well that his building was a trespass. Patten J said: "I have rejected the allegation that the Raydens sought from the start to mislead the Perlmans and that they always intended to carry out their works regardless of the Perlmans' rights . . I do, however, accept that the Raydens did decide to press ahead with the extension regardless of the terms of the planning permission. What is in dispute is whether and to what extent they were also aware that their extension would impinge on the Claimant's property and his rights of access in the way that it did. It is, I think, important to bear in mind that Mr. Perlman is not entitled to damages for a breach by the Raydens of planning control. His cause of action is one in nuisance or trespass. There is no clear evidence that the Raydens knew in advance how their builders intended to construct the extension, any more than they planned the delivery of the dormer window via the roadway. But these were the Raydens' builders and they must, in my judgment, take responsibility for their actions. It also seems to me unlikely that Mr. Rayden was not told by Mr. Izod or the builders at least something about the attempts that were being made to deal with the level of the flank wall. Neither Mr. Nixon nor anyone from the builders has been called to explain why they acted in the way they did. What is, I think, particularly important and significant is that when the queries were raised about the construction of the flank wall, Mr. Rayden continued to deny any wrongdoing, even at a time when he must have known what the true position was and indeed was prepared to admit it to the planning authority. This is a case where I can, I think, properly make an award of aggravated damages, but in doing so I am entitled to take into account the fact that the extension has now been demolished, at considerable cost to the Raydens, and my declaration about the gap to be left ought to prevent problems of this kind occurring in the future . ."
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]

 
 Sati Bissessar (in substitution for Ramsaran Bissessar, deceased) (Legal personal representative of the Estate of Bissessar) v Ganase Lall (Administrator ad litem for the estate of Kissoon Lall); PC 7-Oct-2004 - [2004] UKPC 48
 
Myers v South Lakeland District Council [2004] EWLands ACQ_156_2002
8 Oct 2004
LT

Land

[ Bailii ]
 
Clements and others v Goodacre [2004] EWCA Civ 1406
11 Oct 2004
CA

Land
Boundary dispute
[ Bailii ]
 
Jagdeo Sookraj v Buddhu Samaroo [2004] UKPC 50
12 Oct 2004
PC
Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Steyn, Lord Millett, Lord Scott of Foscote, Baroness Hale of Richmond
Commonwealth, Land, Contract
PC (Trinidad and Tobago) Each party claimed to have entered into a contract to purchase the same land. It was contended that one contract had been rescinded and replaced by another. The issue was whether this left the other contract which had been created second but before the rescission now with priority. Held: The contract had been varied, not rescinded. The basis of that finding was established, and the appeal by the second contractor failed.
1 Cites

[ Bailii ] - [ PC ]
 
Sun Bank Plc v Wootten and Another [2004] EWCA Civ 1423
15 Oct 2004
CA

Land
plea of non est factum
[ Bailii ]
 
Camstead Ltd, Re Law of Property Act 1925 [2004] EWLands LP_26_2003
18 Oct 2004
LT

Land
LT RESTRICTIVE COVENANT – restriction requiring construction to conform to building line – application to amend this limitation to permit erection of one house in garden at rear of existing house – whether erection of garages and sheds breaches covenant requiring dwellinghouse use only – whether any such breach amounts to acquiescence in further breaches – whether restriction obsolete – whether injury to objectors –Law of Property Act 1925, s84(1)(a)(aa)(c).
Law of Property Act 1925 84(1)(a)(aa)(c)
[ Bailii ]
 
Willcox v Tucker [2004] EWLands CRO_143_2003
22 Oct 2004
LT

Land

[ Bailii ]
 
Curley v Parkes [2004] EWCA Civ 1515
25 Oct 2004
CA
Lord Justice Peter Gibson Sir William Aldous
Trusts, Land
The claimant sought leave to an appeal an order dismissing his claim for an interest in the property owned by his former partner and in which they had co-habited. This was the second such house. He sought an interest under a resulting trust, having contributed to the purchase costs. Held: Though the judge had not addressed the issue now raised as to whether a resulting trust had arisen, had he done so, it would not have affected the order. Leave refused.
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Mortimer, Mortimer v Bailey, Waterton-Bailey [2004] EWCA Civ 1514
29 Oct 2004
CA
Lord Justice Peter Gibson Lord Justice Jacob
Land
Appeal against order to demolish extension erected in breach of right of light.
[ Bailii ]
 
Ashbrook, Regina (on the Application Of) v Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs [2004] EWHC 2387 (Admin); Times, 03 November 2004
29 Oct 2004
Admn
Collins J
Land
The local authority sought consent to the erection of a fence around a common which was a site of special scientific interest, saying that without fencing it could not be grazed, and its character would be lost. The claimant objected, and said that an inquiry should be held. The respondent said a public local inquiry should not be held in straightforward cases. Held: Though the legislation was intended to be applied strictly in order to help preserve commons from encroachment, the words of the statute did not require the absurd result contended for by the claimant.
[ Bailii ]
 
Scales and Another v Thames Water Utilities Plc [2004] EWLands LCA_32_2004
10 Nov 2004
LT

Land

[ Bailii ]
 
Smith v Garrard [2004] EWCA Civ 1655
17 Nov 2004
CA
Chadwick LJ
Land
The parties disputed the nature and effect of covenants between neighbours and as to whether parking by one neighbour was a breach of the easement, and in particular whether a covenant against parking on a driveway was to be read to import a condition that the restriction only applied where the parking might operate as an obstruction. Held: The appeal failed. Such disputes fell to be settled on a careful interpretation of the documets involved: "the answer is to be found from the words used in the context in which they were used. It is to be found in the impression which the words make on the mind of an informed reader. To my mind, in this context, the restriction against parking vehicles was not intended to be an absolute restriction, but was to be construed as a restriction against parking vehicles which would interfere with the exercise of rights of way, whether granted in this conveyance or granted in some earlier conveyance or, indeed, granted subsequently."
[ Bailii ]
 
Gennard v Bridgnorth District Council [2004] EWLands BNO_14_2004
19 Nov 2004
LT

Land

[ Bailii ]
 
Georgeski v Owners Corporation SP49833 (2004) 62 NSWLR 534; [2004] NSWSC 1096
22 Nov 2004

Barrett J
Commonwealth, Land
Austlii (Supreme Court of New South Wales) REAL PROPERTY - Crown lands - licence granted by Crown over site of jetty and slipway on bank of tidal river - nature of rights created - whether jetty and slipway are fixtures - effect of provisions of licence declaring them to be "property of" licensee but precluding alteration, removal and destruction while licence subsists - common law rights of public in relation to tidal foreshore - attenuation thereof by statute - TORTS - trespass to land - whether contractual licensee without right of exclusive possession may maintain action in trespass - Manchester Airport plc v Dutton considered - EQUITY - declaratory relief - whether court should at suit of A declare B's rights against C - lack of utility - postulated rights inconsistent with statutory provision
1 Citers

[ Austlii ]
 
Turner and Others v Wakefield and another [2004] EWCA Civ 1725
29 Nov 2004
CA

Land

[ Bailii ]
 
Skupinski, Re Law of Property Act 1925 [2004] EWLands LP_34_2003
30 Nov 2004
LT

Land, Damages
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 to build a house. The development had proceeded without obtaining a modification. High Court proceedings for breach of the covenant were adjourned, at the appeal stage, to allow an application to the tribunal under section 84. The principle of modification was agreed, so that the only issue was compensation. The main issues were, first, the impact of the development on the objector's property, and, secondly, whether she was entitled to compensation assessed, as she claimed, on the negotiated share basis. Held: The President described the impact on her plot as "minimal", and concluded that there should be no compensation.
Law of Property Act 1925
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Verderers of The New Forest v Young and Others [2004] EWHC 2954 (Admin)
1 Dec 2004
Admn
Collins, Stanley Burnton JJ
Land, Agriculture

e New Forest (Confirmation of the Byelaws of the Verderers of the New Forest) Order 1999
[ Bailii ]
 
Barclays Bank v Rowley and Another [2004] EWCA Civ 1764
1 Dec 2004
CA

Land

Law of Property Act 1925 50
[ Bailii ]
 
Fengate Developments (A Partnership) v The Commissioners of Customs and Excise [2004] EWCA Civ 1591; Times, 06 December 2004
1 Dec 2004
CA
Kay, Lord Justice Kay Lord Justice Mummery The Honourable Mr Justice Gage
VAT, Land
Land was transferred by a partnership to one of the partners and his wife. The consideration stated in the transfer was £125,000, but each transferee had paid a similar sum into the partnership account. The respondents said that VAT should have been charged, and on a VAT inclusive price of £250,000. The taxpayer appealed. Held: A transfer of an interest in land is an exempt supply for VAT purposes unless the owner has waived exemption. The partnership had waived exemption. The transfer was not of the interest only of the retiring partner. The form as used was not the sole determinant of the issues. Given the circumstances, the tribunal was free to find as it had.
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Felton Homes Ltd, Re Law of Property Act 1925 [2004] EWLands LP_3_2003
2 Dec 2004
LT

Land
LT RESTRICTIVE COVENANT - modification - discharge - restriction limiting development on plot to one dwellinghouse - application to amend to permit dormer bungalow in rear garden - no interference with objectors' amenities - change in character of estate as some areas developed to greater density - many covenants on estate no longer enforceable - whether restriction obsolete - whether grant of application would result in break-down in system of covenants - Law of Property Act 1925, s.84(1)(a)(aa)(c).
Law of Property Act 1925 84(1)(a)(aa)(c)
[ Bailii ]
 
Ernst Kastner v Marc Jason, Davis Sherman, Brigitte Sherman [2004] EWCA Civ 1599; Times, 21 December 2004
2 Dec 2004
CA
Lord Justice Clarke The Lord Chief Justice Of England &Amp; Wales Lord Justice Rix
Land, Estoppel
The parties had agreed that their dispute should be resolved before the Jewish Beth Din according to Jewish substantive and procedural law. K was granted an interim freezing order. The defendant sold the asset, and K sought to assert a charge. Held: Jewish law specifically provide that the decision of the Beth Din operated in personam only. Such an order could not be translated into an order in rem by seeking to enforce the award in the English Courts. Mr Jason's submission to the Beth Din and its orders could not translate into a proprietary estoppel or constructive trust. English law is not relevant for the purpose of discovering a remedy which Jewish law does not provide.
Arbitration Act 1996 48
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Ranjit-Singh v Parry and others [2004] EWLands LRA_35_2004
6 Dec 2004
LT

Land

[ Bailii ]
 
Francis v Barclays Bank Plc and others [2004] EWHC 2787 (Ch)
7 Dec 2004
ChD

Land

[ Bailii ]
 
Grace Francis v Barclays Bank Plc [2004] EWHC 2787 (Ch)
7 Dec 2004
ChD
The Hon Mr Justice Rattee
Land, Banking, Insolvency


 
Ashfield Land Limited v Mallan Limited Meritcape Limited [2004] EWHC 2815 (Ch)
9 Dec 2004
ChD
The Hon Mr Justice Lightman
Land, Contract

[ Bailii ]
 
University of East London Higher Education Corporation v London Borough of Barking and Dagenham and others [2004] EWHC 2710 (Ch); Times, 03 January 2005
9 Dec 2004
ChD
Lightman J
Land
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 servient lands for different statutory purposes (for public education and for housing), and therefore the covenants had not been discharged. "there is no extinguishment of restrictive covenants when the dominant and servient properties are held by the same trustee on distinct trusts." On a true construction of the particular conveyance however, the land could be sold free of the restrictive covenants, but this would in turn bring into effect the authority's right of pre-emption. If the right was exercised, the price would be as to the land free of the covenants.
Law of Property Act 1925 78 84(2)
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
University of East London Higher Education Corporation v London Borough of Barking and Dagenham and others [2004] EWHC 2908 (Ch); Times, 03 January 2005
14 Dec 2004
ChD
Lightman J
Land, Costs, Civil Procedure Rules
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 to resist the application had survived the introduction of the Civil Procedure Rules (44.3(2)(b)). The circumstances justifying the rule were still applicable. It was reasonable also for the defendants to have had separate representation, and each was entitled to the appropriate costs. There had been a potential conflict of interest.
Law of Property Act 1925 84(20 - Civil Procedure Rules 44.3(2)(b)
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
International UK Ltd. v First Secretary of State and Another [2004] EWHC 3120 (Admin)
14 Dec 2004
Admn

Land

Acquisition of Land Act 1981 23
[ Bailii ]
 
Trailer and Marina (Leven) Ltd, Regina (ex parte) v Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and Another [2004] EWCA Civ 1580; Times, 28 December 2004
15 Dec 2004
CA
Lord Phillips Of Worth Matravers MR, Lord Justice Sedley and Lord Justice Neuberger
Land, Human Rights
The claimant sought a declaration that the 1981 Act, as amended, interfered with the peaceful enjoyment of its possession, namely a stretch of canal which had been declared a Site of Special Scientif Interest, with the effect that it was unusable. It had come to be a habitat for wildlife, and the order prevented the claimant using the canal for leisure purposes. Held: Where the interference was short of an expropriation, but was a substantial interference in the use of property, the court had to find a fair balance between private rights and the public interest. The court had to give appropriate deference to the decisions of the legislature. Provided the legislature thought it right to interfere with use right without compensation, a fair balance would have been struck. The Act had been amended to take away compensation rights. The Act was not inherently incompatible with property rights. It did not prevent all use and was not a disguised expropriation.
Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Bromley, Re Law of Property Act 1925 [2004] EWLands LP_51_2003
16 Dec 2004
LT

Land

[ Bailii ]
 
Mortgage Express v Mardner [2004] EWCA Civ 1859
17 Dec 2004
CA

Land, Equity

[ Bailii ]
 
T Messer and Another v Messer [2004] EWCA Civ 913
21 Dec 2004
CA
Lord Justice Waller
Land, Family
Order for possession
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Copyright 2014 David Swarbrick, 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse, West Yorkshire HD6 2AG.