Wayne Clark discusses Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Ltd v Medley Assets Ltd with Mark Galtrey, who successfully represented the tenant. He defeated the landlord’s opposition under ground (f) to the grant of a new tenancy under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 (‘the Act’)

The decision was handed down in March 2024 by His Honour Judge Richards in Central London Country Court.  Judge Richards decided a novel and important point of law in relation to the extent of ‘the holding’ for the purposes of opposed lease renewals, and also made powerful observations about the quality of expert and factual evidence needed to support a ground (f) opposition by a landlord. 

The discussion centres on that part of the decision that relates to works to the basement and to the question of the extent of the tenant’s holding for the purposes of considering the works falling within ground (f).

Stephen Jourdan KC and Edward Blakeney discuss potential

Join Stephanie Tozer KC, Cecily Crampin and Tricia Hemans as they discuss some of the changes to the law and practice of receivership which they cover in the new edition of their book Mortgage Receivership: Law and Practice.

The book is available for pre-order: https://www.wildy.com/isbn/9780854902996/mortgage-receivership-law-and-practice-2nd-ed-wildy-simmonds-and-hill-publishing

In the latest instalment of the Falcon Chambers' property law podcast, Martin Dray and Tamsin Cox take you on engaging journey as they examine how the law regarding the excessive use of easements works.  On the way they trace the legal developments, refer to the central cases, identify the governing principles and offer practical tips and suggestions for all those advancing or defending claims of excessive use.

Guy Fetherstonhaugh KC and Michael Ranson discuss the MEES regime in the context of rent review. 

Whilst the MEES regime has now been around for a number of years and practitioners will be familiar with the constraints that it places on the letting of ‘substandard’ property, the ramifications of this regime on commercial rent reviews is yet to be fully felt.  

This podcast explores various ways, many of which appear unforeseen both to parliament and property practitioners, in which MEES is likely to affect the application of familiar rent review assumptions and disregards. 

Lease renewal and termination claims under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 Act are very commonly settled, often shortly before trial. This is perhaps no surprise in the context of what is usually a dispute between two professionally advised commercial parties, in which the main point in dispute is often rent. Avoiding the cost and risk of trial will often suit both parties. However, settling 1954 Act proceedings can present traps for the unwary. There are various technicalities to be considered. 

Two Falcon Chambers barristers, Wayne Clark and Toby Boncey, discuss some issues that parties should consider before entering into a 1954 Act settlement agreement.

Early this year we saw the first, and only as yet reported, “remediation contribution order” (“RCO”) decision: the much discussed Batish v Inspired Sutton. Despite the lack of other final decisions, there is insight to be had about how RCOs and ROs appear to be working in the Tribunals, at least from a procedural point of view. Cecily discusses what practitioners can expect, and issues to look out for.

The Product Security and Telecommunications Infrastructure Act 2022 was granted Royal Assent on December 6 2022. In this episode of the Falcon Chambers podcast, four Falcon Chambers barristers take a closer look at the legislation.

Oliver Radley-Gardner KC, Camilla Chorfi, Fern Schofield and Michael Ranson highlight how the new legislation may affect both operators and site providers. 

Please subscribe to the podcast and rate it.

If you have any suggestions for future topics, please send them to [email protected]

Stephen Jourdan QC and Cecily Crampin discuss the recent High Court decision Shah v Power & Kyson [2022] EWHC 209 (QB) and its ramifications.

Cecily Crampin and Tricia Hemans of Falcon Chambers discuss the following cases:

Serene v Salata  [ 2021] EWHC 2433 (Ch): receivers’ duties not breached

Taga v Waterfold Asset Managements [2021] EWHC 1823: interim injunction to restrain receiver sale refused

Houssein v London Credit Ltd [2021] EWHC 1417 (Ch): interim injunction to restrain sale succeeded

Buwule v MT Finance Ltd [2021] 4 WLUK 149: injunction to restrain sale refused

Morley v RBS [2021] EWCA Civ 338: receivers not lender decides when to sell etc

Hurstwood Properties (A) Ltd v Rossendale BC [2021] SC 16: a case about possession for rates which might inform when receiver is an occupier for rates purposes

Battacharya v Oaksix [2021] EWHC 1326 Ch: limitation period for s26 and s28 FSMA 2000.