Speakers' Corner

1. The definition of “house” in s.2(1) of the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 has given rise to considerable difficulties in the 45 years since it was enacted. This year, there have been two further appellate decisions on the definition – Hosebay v Day [2012] 1 WLR 2884 in the Supreme Court (where Lord Carnwath gave the only judgment) and Magnohard Ltd v Cadogan [2012] L. & T.R. 32 in the Court of Appeal (where both Lewison LJ and Lord Neuberger gave judgments). Where do those decisions leave the law?

At their recent annual conference, the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) Dilapidations Forum delegates soundly rejected any suggestion that the PLA Protocol should be scrapped. Inevitably though there are calls for the detail of the document to be revised (dilapidations surveyors are nothing if not persistent when it comes to finding disagreement!).

With the surge in mortgage repossessions, and a large buy-to-let market, it is timely to revisit the issue of the priority (or otherwise) of tenants in relation to mortgagees seeking possession.

When a contract for the sale of property falls through, the normal expectation is that where the fault lies with the buyer, the deposit paid on exchange of contracts will be forfeited. However, the Court is given a wide discretion to order the return of the deposit to the buyer. The precise extent of that discretion has been tested very recently in a judgment of the High Court (Midill (97PL) Limited v Park Lane Estates Limited & Anor [2008] EWHC 18 (Ch).

Dartmouth Court Blackheath Limited v Berisworth Limited [2008] EWHC (Ch) 350

A recent case led me to revisit the question whether a bank can be fixed with the effect of undue influence exercised by a husband over his wife (or wife over husband, but the former is more common) leading her to take on a joint liability to the bank with the husband.

A flurry of cases in recent months has led some commentators to question whether the courts are moving away from the presumption of reality in construing rent review clauses. Is that in fact the case, or are reports of its demise greatly exaggerated?

Obtaining a favourable outcome for a client involved in a property dispute very often depends upon the quality of the opinion evidence provided in support of their case. The most obvious instances are surveyors providing valuation evidence in the context of lease renewals and rent review arbitrations or surveying evidence in the context of dilapidation claims. More often than not, the outcome of the dispute turns upon how favourably the Judge or arbitrator views the evidence that each party provides. Consequently, it is essential to ensure that the expert evidence is of the best possible quality.

Notices are very important in the day-to-day life of a property lawyer. A client’s legal rights will frequently be exercisable by the service of a notice.

My current legal “pet hate” relates to residential service charges and the failure of the law to cater for a very common situation, namely a tenant-owned block of flats. I admit this is personal because I have first hand experience of the headache that comes with being company secretary but even professionally I have encountered many situations where the law just does not sit well with the way it is in “the real world”.