‘The co-ownership of property is a question that vexes all private client lawyers. The recent judgment of Nugee LJ, a former member of these chambers, in Williams v Williams [2024] EWCA Civ 42 involved litigation that touched upon the issue in the context of partnership and real property.’
Wilberforce Chambers, 27th June 2024
Source: www.wilberforce.co.uk
‘The dust should now have settled since the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Guest v Guest (2022). However, in exploring recent case law, this article exposes that the rules applied to decide proprietary estoppel cases remain as uncertain as ever. Some commonality can be identified, but only in the persistent favouring of promisors over promisees. This article criticises the practical and theoretical underpinnings of proprietary estoppel and proposes further reform. In particular, the article draws new links from the doctrine of secret trusts to suggest a more just and certain basis for proprietary estoppel’s future application.’
Trusts & Trustess, 19th March 2024
Source: academic.oup.com
‘In this post, Adam Ferris (Senior Associate) in the Finance Disputes Team at CMS and Henry Powell (Associate) in the Real Estate Disputes Team at CMS comment on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Byers and Ors v Saudi National Bank [2023] UKSC 51, which was handed down on 20 December 2023.’
UKSC Blog, 26th March 2024
Source: ukscblog.com
‘Lord Sales, The Interface Between Contract and Equity – Equity Conference 2023’
Supreme Court, 19th December 2023
Source: www.supremecourt.uk
‘Claimants wishing to bring a discrimination claim under the Equality Act 2010 must do so within 3 months of the discriminatory conduct. Claimants can bring their claim in respect of conduct extending beyond 3 months if the conduct was a sequence of events and the last chain in the event occurred within 3 months of the claim. But when is conduct extending over a period and when is the conduct simply a one-off act with continuing consequences? In Parr v MSR Partners LLP (Formerly Moore Stephens LLP) and Others [2022] EWCA Civ 24, the Court of Appeal held that an equity partner’s demotion to salaried partner was not a continuing act even if he suffered losses many years after the demotion. The demotion was the point at which limitation ran.’
Farrar's Building, 19th January 2022
Source: www.farrarsbuilding.co.uk
‘Keshwala & Anor v Bhalsod & Anor (2021) EWCA Civ 492. This was the second appeal, to the Court of Appeal, of a relief from forfeiture matter for commercial property that we have previously seen in the High Court (our report here). The issue was whether a relief from forfeiture application made just within 6 months of the date of forfeiture was brought with ‘reasonable promptitude’ for the purposes of the equitable relief from from forfeiture.’
Nearly Legal, 18th April 2021
Source: nearlylegal.co.uk
‘Goyal emphasises the importance of knowledge over notice in generating a Quistclose Trust. Solicitors and commercial fund managers should be alert to the possible implications arising from the allocation and management of communications received, mindful that attributed knowledge may still suffice in the right circumstances. Goyal provides an important reminder of the gateway function of an order for an account through which substantive remedies can be accessed. A party’s entitlement to an account following breach of fiduciary duty should not be circumscribed by judicial assumptions that little may be gained from the exercise, nor by considerations of the delay between relevant events and trial. An account may prove to be fruitless but a claimant should be entitled to find this out for themselves.’
New Square Chambers, 23rd March 2020
Source: www.newsquarechambers.co.uk
‘The Supreme Court is to review a controversial ruling that a law firm handling uncontested flight delay claims was not conducting litigation and so did not have an equitable lien over the compensation.’
Litigation Futures, 5th December 2019
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘A Supreme Court justice has added his voice to calls for the regulation of computer algorithms handling crucial decisions about people’s lives. An “expert commission” could help ensure that automated decision making processes have “a capacity for mercy”, Lord Sales (Philip Sales QC), said last night.’
Law Society's Gazette, 13th November 2019
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘Just a quick note to record that the Supreme Court has held that the equitable remedy of relief from forfeiture is not restricted to those with a proprietary interest (lease/tenancy, mortgage etc) but can also extend to licensees with possessory rights (ie a right to occupy or use the land). The whole thing is fascinating, but this is not the place to get into the details of the history of equitable relief.’
Nearly Legal, 29th October 2019
Source: nearlylegal.co.uk
‘For many common lawyers – certainly me – trusts and equity seem exotic things. At one point, I supposed the closest I would get to equity in action was by reading Bleak House, which in length and majesty even rivals some of the equity textbooks. But in this (as many other things) I was proved wrong. One cannot properly understand the law of assignment – a bedrock of the commercial construction lawyer’s practice – without comprehending equitable assignment. And it is at the outer fringes of assignment where one may bump – or even lapse – into trusts.’
Practical Law: Construction Blog, 9th October 2019
‘In this key decision, the Court of Appeal gives detailed consideration to the principles underpinning various doctrines in contract to ascertain the correct test for rectification of a written instrument because of the presence of a common mistake.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 12th August 2019
Source: hardwicke.co.uk
‘Lord Briggs at the Denning Society Annual Lecture, Lincoln’s Inn.’
Supreme Court, 8th November 2018
Source: www.supremecourt.uk
‘The SRA has issued warning notices[1] to solicitors regarding whether they should act and how they should act towards their clients in relation to purported transactions concerning investment schemes. However, for many the warning will have come too late since many investors have previously parted with deposits (in some cases amounting to the client’s life savings) in return for worthless insurance bonds and unsecured interests in land or property which are also found to be worthless when the developer defaults on the development and becomes insolvent.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 12th July 2018
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
‘The High Court has rejected a London borough’s bid to set off the pension benefits of a former senior finance officer who defrauded the council.’
Local Government Lawyer, 24th November 2017
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘Speech by Sir Terence Etherton MR: Equity and Conscience – Eldon Professor’s Lecture.’
Courts and Tribunals Judiciary, 30th October 2017
Source: www.judciary.gov.uk
‘The equity of exoneration is a principle which arises at the difficult intersection of the law of sureties and proprietary interests in jointly-owned property – commonly, family homes. It is a common law doctrine which saw much development in the latter part of the 19th Century, and had not been properly considered by the Court of Appeal since 1898 before the case of Williams v Onyearu.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 9th May 2017
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
‘Proprietary estoppel is a flexible and useful cause of action. Instances of parties claiming entitlement to equitable relief by way of proprietary estoppel have increased markedly in the last few years. Proprietary estoppel is often pleaded in addition to other causes of action, such as resulting trusts, common intention constructive trusts and contract claims. Consequently it is an important area of law for property, family and commercial practitioners.’
Henderson Chambers, June 2016
Source: www.hendersonchambers.co.uk
‘Scott v. Southern Pacific Mortgages Ltd, in which the Supreme Court gave judgment on 22nd October 2014, has finally determined, in favour of the mortgagees, the question of priority between home owners, who had sold their homes under sale and leaseback schemes after getting into financial difficulties in return for the grant of a tenancy from the purchaser, and the mortgagees who provided the finances for the purchases. In order for the home owners’ unregistered interests to override a registered disposition under the Land Registration Act 2002, the interest had to be a proprietary interest, but prior to acquiring the legal estate a purchaser could not grant equitable rights of a proprietary character, as opposed to personal rights.’
Full story (PDF)
Radcliffe Chambers, 10th February 2015
Source: www.radcliffechambers.com
‘We have dealt with the basic facts in Scott v Southern Pacific Mortgages Ltd [2014] UKSC 52 when considering its previous incarnations (Cooke v Mortgage Business [2012] EWCA Civ 17 and Re North East Property Buyers Ltd [2010] EWHC 2991 (Ch)). In summary, the basic question for the Supreme Court was this: where a seller has agreed, prior to the contract of sale, that the buyer will grant the seller a tenancy after the sale, does the seller have that right so as not only to bind the buyer but also the buyer’s lender? I think, when framed as a question like that, the answer seems obvious. Call me a weak-kneed liberal, but all the equity (colloquially speaking) is in favour of the seller. They have entered in to the transaction on that basis and would not have entered in to the transaction otherwise. We all make bad deals which the law doesn’t get us out of, but the equity isn’t really in our favour: why should the law get us out of a bad deal?’
Nearly Legal, 14th December 2014
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2024