Introduction
Welcome to the Property Newsletter from Gatehouse Chambers. I am standing in as editor over the summer months, whilst Laura Tweedy has a well-deserved break from her editing duties until September (but, alas, not from work in general, which is keeping her busy as usual!)
Although the weather in the UK might not have got entirely the right idea this year, we are here with a bumper summer edition to keep you entertained on those all too regular rainy days, or, if you're jetting off to sunnier climes, some light holiday reading...
- Brie Stevens-Hoare KC looks at notices of assignment and specifically how we ought to interpret s.136(1) LPA 1925 in today's modern world, in order to ensure the creation of valid and binding assignments of debts and other choses in action.
- Kort Egan considers the Court of Appeal's recent decision in Winter & Anor -v- Winter & Anor [2024] EWCA Civ 699, which focussed on the assessment of detriment in a proprietary estoppel claim where the claimants had received substantial countervailing benefits.
- Gemma de Cordova & Laura Tweedy (alongside their instructing solicitors Helena Davies & Oskar Musial) are back with their second article concerning the decision in Anglo International Upholland Ltd -v- Wainwright [2023] 5 WLUK 613 and the novel methods of service which were permitted by the High Court when granting a quia timet injunction against "urban explorers".
- Lina Mattsson's "Did you miss?" feature highlights the Upper Tribunal's decision in Nicholson -v- Hale [2024] UKUT 153 (LC), which concerned the efficacy of signage in preventing the acquisition of prescriptive rights.
I hope you enjoy this edition of the newsletter. We will be back in August with more updates.
Victoria Dacie-Lombardo, Editor
What have we been up to?
Laura Tweedy is having a break from editing the newsletter over the summer but is working on some really interesting cases including a COP property matter and a derogation from grant case. She has built up excellent experience as a mediator and is mediating a few property disputes over the summer too. Laura is keen to continue to expand into mediation, should you ever be looking for a mediator.
David Peachey is feeling like the fun police, having recently shut down an (admittedly illegal) nightclub in Mayfair, and successfully resisted an injunction being sought to keep a pub open in Cardiff.
Victoria Dacie-Lombardo is enjoying covering the editor role over the summer months. Elsewhere she has been thinking about and advising on adverse possession, business lease renewals, restrictive covenants and neighbour disputes.
John de Waal KC has been in Colombo, Sri Lanka talking on mediation to the Sri Lanka Bar Council and is currently drafting Particulars of Claim in a knowing assistance / breach of trust case which requires proceedings to be served in Gibraltar.
Jamal Demachkie has been sitting in the Crown Court for half of this month, but has still found time for some advices on rent reviews, forfeiture of leases, and valuation of care homes.
Andrew Skelly has also been sitting in the Crown Court (and the County Court) this month, and is looking forward to some time off for good behaviour, in Rhodes. Otherwise, he has been seeking an injunction to prevent noise from a gym above his client's commercial premises, and advising on business tenancy renewals, rights of way, rights to light and restrictive covenants.
Phil Marriott has had a service charge heavy month, working on both residential and commercial cases. Beyond this, he has been looking at some interesting s.21 points and working on a matter concerning both agreements for lease and construction delay claims.
Brie Stevens-Hoare KC has been in Brighton sitting on an adverse possession claim and wishing it was dry enough to go in the sea. Other than that she has been dealing with a lot of anger around the management of large mansion blocks in various bits of London and some interesting overage and option agreements. There has been a side portion of property transaction prof neg thrown in for good measure.
James Hall has been mediating and attending heavy WP meetings, with the usual prof neg/property/insurance flavours.
Carl Brewin has been dealing with arguments on specific performance, advising on service charges amongst other things, also some sitting, the seaside and errrr...Stevenage. Can't have it all.
Lina Mattsson has had a manic summer with various injunctions relating to forfeiture, trespass and private nuisance. She has been advising on disrepair, s 84 applications and 54-Act renewals. Lina is so ready for the beach in Croatia which awaits her. Buckets and spades are packed.
News
Legal 500 Bar Awards
We are absolutely delighted that Chambers has been nominated for 10 awards at the Legal 500 Bar Awards including Property and Housing Set of the Year.
Property team members Brie Stevens-Hoare KC, John de Waal KC, James Hall, Alison Meacher and Senior Practice Manager Patrick Sarson are all nominated for individual awards. Congratulations to all the nominees!
Delivering valid notices of assignment: s 136 in 2024
The Law of Property Act 1925 (LPA 1925) was enacted 99 years ago in April 1925. A few years before the first commercial radio and telephone service. Historians might argue about the comparative economic and social significance, and value, of the ability to assign debts and/or the right to sue now and then. No one could argue that the form and content of commercial documentation and communications has not changed dramatically in those 99 years. Yet the wording of s 136(1) of the LPA 1925 has not changed at all. Electronic communications are now the norm in the commercial world. They have brought with them less formality and less time to think than pen and paper afforded us in the past. This article focuses principally on how we should understand that 1925 provision today in order to ensure valid, legal (or statutory) assignments that bind the debtor, or third parties are effected. This article is confined to the legal position in England and Wales.
The full article, first published by LexisNexis (JIBFL), can be accessed here.
Authored by Brie Stevens-Hoare KC.
New methods of service a boon to landowners seeking interim injunctions against persons unknown
A recent landmark decision may allow novel and unusual methods of service in welcome news for landowners who seek to prevent trespassing by persons unknown.
Laura Tweedy and Gemma de Cordova, alongside Helena Davies and Oskar Musial explore the court's findings in Anglo International Upholland Ltd v Wainwright [2023] 5 WLUK 613 about service of the application and injunction order, which includes a novel permission for service by named defendant on the other defendant (persons unknown) and by way of a printed QR code.
Click here to read the full article by Laura Tweedy and Gemma de Cordova, alongside Helena Davies and Oskar Musial (Brabners).
Detriment, what detriment?
The Court of Appeal in Winter & Anor v Winter & Anor [2024] EWCA Civ 699 recently considered an appeal focused on the finding of the judge at first instance that there was detriment for the purposes of a proprietary estoppel claim. The case provides a useful recap of the relevant principles to be applied when detriment falls to be considered.
Read the full article by Kort Egan here.
Did you miss? Nicholson v Hale [2024] UKUT 153
Nicholson v Hale [2024] UKUT 153 (LC)
The Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) recently considered the efficacy of signage in preventing the acquisition of a prescriptive right of way by an adjoining landowner.
The facts
The Appellants had acquired Number 4 in 2020; the Respondents had owned and occupied Number 6 since 1996. Until the Appellants acquired Number 4, there had been an open staircase leading from its forecourt to the walkway. The Appellants demolished the staircase and enclosed the forecourt to create a walled garden. The Respondents asserted that they had acquired a private right of way over the staircase by prescription.
Click here to access the full summary by Lina Mattsson.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.