Archive for November 2011
How long do Court Proceedings for Possession take?
As many of our regular readers may be aware the time taken for Courts to process claims particularly in the London Region has extended dramatically.
We would normally say that an accelerated possession claim if no Court hearing was required would take …
Comments Off
And you find that power where?
By s.168, Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002, a landlord may not serve a notice under s.146, Law of Property…
Comments Off
Enfranchisement: can you bring multiple claims?
Recently the High Court has ruled on the case of Westbrook Dolphin Square Limited v. Friends Provident Life and Pensions Limited.
The Leasehold Reform Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 expressly considers the position which may arise when a Notice…
Comments Off
Case Comment: Kernott v Jones [2011] UKSC 53
By Stephanie Smith, Arden Chambers
In this appeal (from [2010] EWCA Civ 578) – their Lordships were charged with revisiting the…
Comments Off
Tail docking – the Animal Welfare Act 2006
The practice of tail docking is contentious. It involves the amputation of a puppy’s tail and is performed without…
Comments Off
Laying the foundations …
The “new” housing strategy published today, Laying the Foundations: A Housing Strategy for England, has some interesting bits to it,…
Comments Off
Case Comment: O’Brien v MoJ [2010] UKSC 34, Opinion of Advocate General Kokott (C-393/10)
By Claire Darwin, Matrix
In August 2010, the Supreme Court unanimously referred the appeal of Mr O’Brien QC, a former fee-paid…
Comments Off
Its all in the Drafting!
The recent case of Estafnous v London and Leeds Business Centres Ltd (LLBC) showed what can happen where an agreement is drafted which does not cover the way the sale is finally concluded. In this case, LLBC wished to sell a property known as Regent Ho…
Comments Off
Case Comment: Gale v Serious Organised Crime Agency [2011] UKSC 49
In Gale v Serious Organised Crime Agency, the UK Supreme Court sent a simple message to Strasbourg: if we are duty bound to follow decisions of the ECtHR then, at least in this area, they need to be clearer. A new decision from the Grand Chamber on thi…
Comments Off
No further forward
One of the most vexing questions in service charge litigation is the interaction between default judgment and s.81, Housing Act 1996. In summary, s.81, 1996 Act requires that, before any notice under s.146, Law of Property Act 1925 (forfeiture) can be served, or any right of re-entry exercised, there must be a “final determination” that the amount of the service charge is due. This can be provided by the LVT, arbitral tribunal or court. Alternatively, the tenant can admit the sum is due.
Now, is a default judgment a “final determination” for these purposes? This is quite important because, in the overwhelming majority of service charge arrears cases, the landlord… Read the full post
Comments Off