Archive for February 2008
Baker & Ors, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Communities & Local Government& Ors  EWCA Civ 141. A Court of Appeal judgment on appeals of refusal for planning permission for the retention of mobile homes on green belt land by Irish traveller families. The appeal failed, but what is particularly [...]
A more than a little unusual Court of Appeal judgment on adverse possession has just been handed down. Roberts v Crown Estate Commissioners  EWCA Civ 98. I won’t go into the details – it involved a challenge to Crown possession of an area of foreshore and river bed of the Severn by the purchaser [...]
The dispute concerned the foreshore and bed of theSevern estuary. The Crown was entitled to rely upon the Limitation Act 1980 and it was irrelevant that the adverse possession originated in an unlawful entry on to the land.
OK, so they are late. In fact so late that the Times has started to catch up. Finally, some brief comments on the three cases from last week.
Majorstake Limited (Respondents) v Curtis (Appellant)  UKHL 10. What constitutes a premises for the purposes of section 47(2)(b)(ii) of the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act [...]
The mortgagee had failed to take any steps to enforce its right to possession of a property for a period that exceeded 12 years since the right of possession first accrued. The Court of Appeal held that the mortgagor was in adverse possession of the property for in excess of 12 years and the lender’s legal charge was extinguised by virtue of sections 15 and 17 of the Limitation Act 1980.
The Court of Appeal held that a notice excluding the Landlord and Tenant Act Pat II which was served more than 14 days before the execution of the leases was valid even though an incorrect statutory declaration under the Regulatory Reform (Business Tenancies) (England and Wales) Order 2003 had been served. In the circumstances there had been a valid exclusion agreement and the landlord was entitled to possession.
Hot off the press – judgment released today.
Birmingham, apparently intent on suicide, appealed the judicial review decision in Aweys. Birmingham City Council v Abdishakur Aweys & Ors  EWCA Civ 48. They lost, badly, on all counts.
Birmingham argued that accommodation that was not suitable under section 175(3) could still be suitable for a limited time [...]
The House of Lords considered the meaning of the phrase “any premises in which the flat is contained” in the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993, section 47(2)(b). This phrase had to be an objectively recognisable physical space and something which would be objectively recognised as “premises”.
Wragg & Ors v Surrey County Council  EWCA Civ 19 is an appeal on the refusal of some Right to Buy applications, but the main issue is when a tenancy falls under Schedule 1, para 2(1) Housing Act 1985, which provides:
“? a tenancy is not a secure tenancy if the tenant is an employee [...]
Ofulue & Anor v Bossert  EWCA Civ 7 deals with an adverse possession case prior to the Land Registration Act 2002.
The (then) law on adverse possession does not breach Art.1 Protocol 1, Pye v United Kingdom  ECHR 44302/02 applied. In order not to fall under the Pye margin of appreciation, a case’s [...]