Introduction
Welcome to the May edition of the Property Newsletter from
Gatehouse Chambers.
Congratulations to our Patrick Sarson on his well-earned and
well-deserved appointment as Senior Practice Manager to the
Property, Private Client and Professional Negligence Teams. Patrick
has been with Gatehouse since 2014, is recommended by the Legal 500
and in 2021 won the Chambers Professional of the Year at the
Advocate Bar Pro Bono Awards.
This month Priya Gopal looks at the Privy Council
decision in Nature Resorts Ltd v First Citizens Bank
[2022] UKPC 10 in which undue influence in the context of a
mortgage over commercial property was considered and where the
Privy Council offered practical guidance applicable to all cases
for relevant factors to consider and weigh up if undue influence is
being asserted.
Brie Stevens-Hoare QC and Amanda Eilledge consider the impact of
co-owner forgery following the decision in Victus Estates and
others v Munroe and others [2021] EWHC 2411 (Ch).
Jamal Demachkie also spins the wheel of
questions for us.
The next newsletter will be in June.
Carl Brewin – Editor
Activity report – a selection of what some of us have
been up to this month
John de Waal QC has finished a month-long
trial for the BMA and is preparing for another long trial in June
concerning a dispute between property developers in South
Kensington.
Brie Stevens-Hoare QC has been juggling
boundary disputes, restrictive covenants, an interesting
rectification claim and a couple of wonderfully complicated
old-fashioned adverse possession and accretion claims over this
last month.
Daniel Gatty’s month has involved
everything from forfeiture of a commercial lease to disputed rights
of way via private cemeteries (the case about a cemetery in which
Daniel succeeded in the High Court last year is making its way
towards a hearing in the Court of Appeal) and solicitors’
(alleged) negligence. A veritable smorgasbord of property-themed
disputes.
James Hall has been advising, again, in the
ultra-niche area of Inclosure Awards, requiring trawling through
private Acts of Parliament (not easy to get hold of) from 1801 all
the way through to the early twentieth century. Did you know that
if you breach any provision of the St Mary’s Nottingham
(Nottinghamshire) Inclosure Act 1845 (8 & 9 Vict.) for which no
other particular penalty is provided then a magistrate may still
fine you £5 (!) for doing so? So says
section CLIX of the Act. Yes, all the section numbers are in Roman
numerals….
Jamal Demachkie has been sunning himself on
holiday and, now back to work, has an exciting month of development
disputes and forfeiture to look forward to.
Before setting off to spend much of this month running half
marathons or just taking time out in Mallorca and Dubai, Andrew Skelly was successful in a trial in the
High Court in Manchester, representing a developer in a claim
against Network Rail relating to defective drainage.
Steven Woolf continues his one-man crusade to
protect Green Spaces, this time with a planning appeal in Epping
and an Injunction in Gloucester. Thankfully, there was a lot of
other L&T and property work involving buildings to keep him
grounded.
Lina Mattsson has had another month of
boundary disputes, including two trials with another two about to
kick-off. She has also been advising on restrictive covenants,
easements and TOLATA claims. Lina will be celebrating yet another
birthday this month – so looking forward to eating a lot of
cake!
When
not running in Spain (2 runs in 4 weeks including one around the
Sherry Winery’s and vineyards in Jerez) Monty Palfrey has been busy advising on the
potential options for rent arrear recovery including peaceable
re-entry and trying to understand why tenants believe it is a good
idea to carry out unauthorised alterations.
David Peachey has been busy on a range of
matters ranging from undue influence to agent liability and
subsidence, capping it all off with a bit of cross-jurisdictional
enforcement.
Laura Tweedy is having a busy month, advising
a tenant on recoverability of an insurance shortfall for property
reinstatement following a landlord’s breach of repairing
covenant, as well as unlawful eviction. She has also been to court
on a really interesting pro bono case looking at what will happen
to an unmarried couple’s property following relationship
breakdown: the law and the facts are particularly
gritty/complicated/harrowing so is looking forward to enjoying Pub
in the Park this weekend to relax!
Events
The Property Team continue to host their series of Brews on
Zoom, an informal chat that lets you in to our team’s thoughts
and discussion surrounding current issues and practical challenges
practitioners and their clients are facing. Wandering children
and/or pets are very welcome…bring your own hot drink!
J2J ‘Laying the Foundations’ Webinar
Series
Gatehouse Chambers’ Junior Property Team are delighted to
introduce their latest J2J webinar programme. These interactive
online sessions are aimed at junior lawyers wishing to build up
their knowledge of some of the issues that come up regularly in
practice and more senior practitioners looking for a refresher. All
of the webinars will take place via Zoom. Delegates can pick and
choose which webinars they would like to attend, or register for
all of them by getting in touch.
Click here to download the full programme.
Please contact our events team if you would like to attend any of
these webinars.
Gatehouse Chambers on Demand
You can catch up on our previous webinars and Brews by visiting
the insights page on our website.
Re-visiting undue influence
This article examines the recent decision in Nature
Resorts Ltd v First Citizens Bank Ltd [2022] UKPC 10
where the Privy Council considered the application of the undue
influence doctrine in the context of a mortgage over commercial
property.
Read Priya Gopal’s article here.
Property Litigation Column: when is a sham not a sham?
Brie Stevens-Hoare QC and Amanda Eilledge consider the impact of
co-owner forgery following the decision in Victus Estates and
others v Munroe and others [2021] EWHC 2411 (Ch).
Read the full article here.
Did you see? You may have missed…
Mr Charles Beresford Davies-Gilbert v Mr Henry James
Goacher, Mr Steven Adrian Chester [2022] EWHC 969
Restrictive Covenants – Refusal of Consent –
Burden of proof – Reasonableness
Read Lina Mattsson’s case summary here.
“Gatehouse Chambers Unrobed” – get to know us
better
Each month, a member of our property team has to spin ‘the
Wheel of Questions’ and answer the first 3 questions that come
up. This month, Jamal Demachkie tried his luck with the
wheel.
What’s the first concert you attended?
I wish I could say it was something cool and trendy but instead
it was Capital FM’s Party in the Park in the late-90s.
What was your first job?
At ‘Eastcote Sports’- an imaginatively named sports-shop
in Eastcote. To this day, I retain an ability to gauge
someone’s shoe-size by just looking at their feet.
If you could instantly become an expert in something,
what would it be?
Law – it would make the day-job a lot
easier.
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.
Credit: Source link
