There are two things in property litigation that seem more likely than not: (1) new proprietary estoppel cases will concern farms, (2) new easement cases will concern parking rights.
Author: plawg
Derby Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (and 16 others) v Derby City Council (and 44 others) [2019] EWHC 3436 (Ch)
Case note: the meaning of ‘charitable purposes only’
The P Word
Manchester Ship Canal Co Ltd v Vauxhall Motors Ltd (formerly General Motors UK Ltd) [2019] UKSC 46
Churston Golf v Haddock [2019] EWCA Civ 544
Fencing easement, or positive covenant?
Thorpe v Frank [2019] EWCA Civ 150
The Court of Appeal recently gave further guidance on the appropriate test for factual possession in the context of an adverse possession claim.
Toms v Ruberry [2019] EWCA Civ 128
Can a forfeiture notice under the Law of Property Act 1925, s146 be served after the relevant breach of covenant, but before the date of the contractual right of re-entry?
Unsatisfactory presumptions in the reservation of easements
The law concerning reservation easements is somewhat anomalous in the presumptions that it employs. This blog post considers the decision in St Edmundsbury and Ipswich Diocesan Board of Finance v Clark (No 2) and its unsatisfactory result.
Sunset 2018 and the dawn of 2019
The end of 2018 saw a flurry of property law cases handed down, the publishing of the Law Commission Commonhold Consultation Paper, and the passing of the Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2018. This blog post summarises those developments, and looks forward to what can be expected from the first big case of 2019, Canary Wharf Group v European Medicines.
Comparing security of tenure in the private sector
Two recent cases from the European Court of Human Rights and the United Kingdom Supreme Court place further distance between the security of tenure enjoyed by residential and business tenants in the private sector.
The Alexander Devine Children’s Cancer Trust v Millgate Development Ltd and Others [2018] EWCA Civ 2679
The Court of Appeal delivered a strong statement to those who develop land in breach of a restrictive covenant in the hope that they can modify those covenants at a later date.









