Archive for July 2006
The Court of Appeal held that the judge had been entitled to find that the Claimant property developer had proprietary estoppel against it. The Court also held that the judge had been entitled to grant the developer a lien for 50% of the increase in value of a property. Other options such as reimbursement would not be adequate compensation and putting a value on the loss of the contract would be too speculative.
The starting point in assessing damages for a lessor’s breach of a repairing covenant is generally the notional reduction in rental value of the property.
An incorporeal hereditament could constitute premises for the purposes of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 s.23, in this case the right to use a parking space.
A notice to quit by the Appellant’s wife was effective in terminating a secure joint tenancy whether or not he concurred. In order to determine whether he was homeless pursuant to the Housing Act 1996 s.175 it was necessary to consider whether the Appellant had a licence to occupy and what were its terms.
Norman & Anor v Secretary of State for the Environment, Food & Rural Affairs  EWHC 1881 (Admin) (05 July 2006)
A landowner’s evidence as to his intention to dedicate the footpath on the ground should have been taken into account by a planning inspector with regard to s.31(1) of the Highways Act 1980.