“Not all squatters are bad, a senior judge has said, as he suggested an Englishman’s home is no longer his castle.”
Daily Telegraph, 3rd July 2013
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
The Daily Telegraph have recently introduced a limited paywall. Users will be permitted to view 20 Daily Telegraph articles per month for free, after which they will need to pay a subscription fee to access content.
“At a time when the bedroom tax is coming to dominate debates about housing and fairness in our society, Liz Davies considers the options available to local councils in resisting this policy of central government.”
Garden Court Chambers Blog, 1st July 2013
Source: www.gclaw.wordpress.com
“Reading BC v Holt is an important case on the approach to be taken by the courts when making possession orders under Ground 16 (and since 1/4/12, 15A) of the Housing Act 1985.”
NearlyLegal, 23rd June 2013
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
“The operator of a property scheme who misled vulnerable customers to make money from the sale of their homes has been fined almost £1m by the City regulator and banned from working in the financial services industry.”
The Guardian, 19th June 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
Reading Borough Council v Holt [2013] EWCA Civ 641; [2013] WLR (D) 222
“When determining whether a possession order should be made under section 84 of the Housing Act 1985, the expression ‘suitable accommodation’ in section 84(2)(b) and (c) and Schedule 2 to the Housing Act 1985 was broad enough to encompass accommodation identified by reference to its essential characteristics and did not require the identification of a specific property.”
WLR Daily, 7th June 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“We’ve all seen the ubiquitous scene from the American court-room drama where the bespectacled and previously underrated legal assistant/student/intern etc. bursts into the back of the crowded court, and shouts ‘State v. Jones’ whilst waving the paper judgment triumphantly at the judge. The judge is thereby stopped from making the patently unjust ruling he was about to make, changing his mind in favour of the film’s protagonist. This doesn’t happen in real life, so it was with much anticipation that I awaited the case of Johnson v Old [2013] EWCA Civ 415, which I used in court less than 24 hours after it was handed down. My thanks go to Karen Reid, one of our pupils at 1 Gray’s Inn Square, who rushed from the RCJ, clutching the judgment, ink still drying from Sir John Chadwick’s quill (well, printer at least).”
The Barristers’ Hub, 12th June 2013
Source: www.barristershub.co.uk
“Forfeiture is, for the most part, beloved by landlords and hated/feared by tenants. For what might be relatively minor breaches of covenant, you can lose your lease and the landlord make an enormous windfall. The legislative trend is (slowly) in favour of restricting (and possibly even abolishing) forfeiture as demonstrated by s.168, Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002. By s.168, Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002, a landlord may not serve a notice under s.146, Law of Property Act 1925, or otherwise exercise a right of re-entry (i.e. forfeiture) in respect of a breach of a covenant (other than one to pay rent – which is unaffected by s.146, see s.146(11); or service/administration charges, which are dealt with under s.81, Housing Act 1996), unless the breach has been admitted by the tenant or determined by a court, LVT or arbitral tribunal.”
NearlyLegal, 3rd June 2013
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
Newbold and others v Coal Authority [2013] EWCA Civ 584 ; [2013] WLR (D) 216
“Where damage notices relating to subsidence said to have been caused by coal mining contained ostensibly inaccurate particulars, the effect of the failure to comply strictly with the applicable statutory requirements had to be considered by construing the statutory or contractual requirement in question and then asking whether strict or adequate compliance was required, bearing in mind that even non-compliance with a requirement might not be fatal to the notice’s validity.”
WLR Daily, 23rd May 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Hunt v Conwy County Borough Council [2013] EWHC 1154 (Ch); [2013] WLR (D) 205
“It was open to the court to entertain an application under section 320(2)(c) to vest a dwelling in its occupants notwithstanding that the applicant occupied only part of the disclaimed property as his dwelling house and it was open to the court, on such an application, to make an order relating to only a part of the disclaimed property.”
WLR Daily, 8th May 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“In April 2013, the so called ‘bedroom tax’ was introduced, meaning that a single person or couple with no children will have their housing benefit reduced by 14% where they occupy two bedroom accommodation and 25% if they occupy three or more beds.”
Hardwicke Chambers, 24th May 2013
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
“The entrepreneurialisation of social housing over the last twenty years has led to a diversity in the types of shared ownership. Of course, the standard leasehold type (what in the old days was called DIYSO) predominates, but there are a multitude of other types. In Ker v Optima Community Association [2013] EWCA Civ 579, the Court of Appeal had to deal with one of these other types in Optima’s claim for possession; but in quite odd circumstances for, by the time of the hearing of the appeal, Ms Ker had accepted that the property was unaffordable for her so that she had to give up possession. What was in issue seems to have been whether she was entitled to return of some of the amounts she had paid. Patten LJ, who gave the only substantive judgment, held that she did not have such a claim and ordered possession.”
NearlyLegal, 25th May 2013
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
“Unusually, this is a published Judicial Review permission decision. Further, Anthony Thornton QC J has ‘certified that this judgment may be cited and referred to in other cases or situations. This direction is made pursuant to paragraph 6.1 of the Practice Direction (Citation of Authorities) [2001] 1 WLR 1001, CA.’. Why will become clear.”
NearlyLegal, 27th May 2013
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
“Residents of mobile home parks in England have been given new rights to protect them from rogue site operators.”
BBC News, 27th May 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
LexisNexis asked David Nicholls to consider the court’s discretion to make a vesting order in light of the recent case Hunt and another v Conwy County Borough Council [2013] All ER (D) 101 (May) in the Chancery Division.”
Full story (PDF)
11 Stone Buildings, 15th May 2013
Source: www.11sb.com
“SL v Westminster [2013] UKSC 27 is a very important case concerning the meaning of ‘care and attention’ in the context of s.21, National Assitance Act 1948.”
NearlyLegal, 20th May 2013
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
“Sheila Hamilton Macdonald, barrister, examines the implications of the Court of Appeal judgment in Thompson v Hurst; a cohabitee property dispute in which the property had been registered in the name of only one of the cohabitees.”
Family Law Week, 16th May 2013
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
Hotak v Southwark London Borough Council [2013] EWCA Civ 515; [2013] WLR (D) 180
“When assessing an applicant’s priority need for accommodation under section 189(1)(c) of the Housing Act 1996 the local housing authority was entitled to consider evidence of personal support and assistance provided by a family member which would continue should the applicant become street homeless. The weight to be given to the evidence was a separate and important consideration. The reviewing officer was required to assess the vulnerability of the applicant as it would be when he was made homeless.”
WLR Daily, 15th May 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“This a late note on OR -v- Secretary of State for Work and Pensions and Isle of Anglesey CC [2013] UKUT 065 (AAC) because, bluntly, I had read it quickly at the time and overlooked its broader significance.”
NearlyLegal, 19th May 2013
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
“Hotak v Southwark LBC [2013] EWCA Civ 515 concerned a short point on whether an authority was entitled to have regard to the assistance that a homeless person would receive, in the event he became homeless, when determining whether he was vulnerable or not.”
NearlyLegal, 15th May 2013
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
“The Court of Appeal has dismissed a claim for leasehold enfranchisement by the occupiers of a mixed-use property, ruling that the property, part of which had been converted into a flat against the landlord’s wishes, was not a ‘house reasonably so called.”
OUT-LAW.com, 14th May 2013
Source: www.out-law.com
© Inner Temple Library 2024