Law Forum
  Law Books

Adverts from Google:
 
 
Google
 
Web www.swarb.co.uk

Land - 1999

Land Law. Now includes Easements, Restrictive Covenants, occupier's liability. See also Land Charges, Registered Land, Landlord & Tenant, Housing

These cases are extracted from a very large database. The entries on that database are now being published individually to the main swarb.co.uk website in a much improved form. As cases are published here, the entry here will be replaced by a link to the same case in that improved form on swarb.co.uk. In addition the swarb.co.uk site includes very substantial numbers of cases after 2000. Please take the time to look.  

This page lists 143 cases, and was prepared on 21 October 2013. These case are being transferred one by one to the main swarb.co.uk site which presents them better, with links to full text where we have it, and much improved cross referencing.
McLennan -v- Attorney-General [1999] 2 NZLR 469
1999

Smellie J
Commonwealth, Land Casemap
1 Citers
"For the purpose of a valid offer to sell land under s 40(2)(c) of the Public Works Act 1981 the date on which the current market value is to be determined is the date on which the land is validly offered back or the date on which the valid offer back should have been made, if it is established that there has been a failure to act timeously and with due expedition in all the circumstances of the particular case, in determining to make an endeavour to sell the land in terms of s 40(1) and in determining to offer to sell the land in terms of s 40(2)."
Public Works Act 1981 (New Zealand) 40(2)(c)
Wagstaff -v- Department of Environment Transport and the Regions [1999] 2 EGLR 108
1999

Land Casemap
1 Citers
Prabhuhai and Manubhai Patel -v- Walsall Metropolitan District Council ACQ/103/1999
1999
LT
Land
Link[s] omitted
West -v- Sharp (1999) 79 P & CR 32
1999
CA
Mummery LJ
Land
1 Citers
Mummery LJ set out the test to be applied when asking whether there had been a substantial interference in the exercise of an easement so as to be actionable: "Not every interference with an easement, such as a right of way, is actionable. There must be a substantial interference with the enjoyment of it. There is no actionable interference with a right of way if it can be substantially and practically exercised as conveniently after as before the occurrence of the alleged obstruction. Thus, the grant of a right of way in law in respect of every part of a defined area does not involve the proposition that the grantee can in fact object to anything done on any part of the area which would obstruct passage over that part. He can only object to such activities, including obstruction, as substantially interfere with the exercise of the defined right as for the time being is reasonably required by him. Authority for that is to be found in the judgment of Russell L.J. in Keefe v. Amor [1965] 1 Q.B. 334 at 347. As Scott J. held in Celsteel Ltd v. Alton House Ltd [1985] 1 W.L.R. 204 at 217: "There emerge from the three cases I have cited two criteria relevant to the question whether a particular interference with a right of way is actionable. The interference will be actionable if it is substantial. And it will not be substantial if it does not interfere with the reasonable use of the right of way."
Elliot -v- Safeways Stores Plc [1999] 1 WLR 1396
1999

Land
Marzari -v- Italy (1999) 28 EHRR CD 175
1999
ECHR
Human Rights, Land, Housing

The applicant suffered from metabolic myopathy and was 100 per cent disabled. He was allocated an apartment which he considered inadequate. He ceased paying rent for it, demanding that certain works be carried out to make it suitable for him to live in. He was evicted on the application of his public authority landlord following this failure. His complaint under article 8 was for lack of respect for his private life, but he also complained article 8. Held: "that the applicant's eviction from his apartment interfered with his rights under Article 8(1). The Court therefore has to examine whether the interference was justified under the terms of paragraph 2 of Article 8." In the result, the Court did not find "any appearance of a breach" of article 8 on account of the authorities' decision to proceed with the applicant's eviction from his apartment. Article 8 does not 'guarantee the right to have one's housing problem solved by the authorities'. "To the extent that the ITEA aimed at recovering possession of the apartment on the ground that the applicant had ceased to pay the rent, the Court considers that the impugned decision had a legitimate purpose under paragraph 2 of Article 8, namely the protection of the rights of others."
European Convention on Human Rights 8
Ropaigealach -v- Barclays Bank plc [1998] EWCA Civ 1960; [2000] QB 263; [1999] 4 All ER 235
6 Jan 1999
CA
Henry, Chadwick, Clarke LJJ
Land, Litigation Practice Casemap
1 Cites
1 Citers
The applicant's property was charged to the defendant. At the time it was not occupied. The mortgage fell into arrears, and after serving notice at the property, the bank took posssession and sold the property at auction. The claimants said the bank should have taken possession only after court proceedings. Held: A lender taking possession of a dwelling house under a mortgage without recourse first to court action, was not subject to the restrictions on suspension of possession for those who did apply to court. The statute could not be extended to imply such limits. The court considered the authorities at length. Chadwick LJ: "I find it impossible to be satisfied that Parliament must have intended, when enacting section 36 of the Act of 1970, that the mortgagee’s common law right to take possession by virtue of his estate should only be exercisable with the assistance of the court. In my view, the only conclusion as to Parliamentary intention that this Court can properly reach is that which can be derived from the circumstances in which the section was enacted, the statutory context in which it appears and the language which was used. " The section in the 1970 Act was intended only to correct the problem identified in Caunt.
Administration of Justice Act 1970 - Administration of Justice Act 1973 8
Link[s] omitted
Britannia Building Society -v- Brian Sylvester Barclay and the Executors of Ivylyn Delattiboudier (Deceased) [1999] EWCA Civ 537
12 Jan 1999
CA
Land
Posssession under mortgage.
[ Bailii ]
Bristol and West Plc -v- Victor Babatunde Sunday Olaku Victoria Edith Olaku [1999] EWCA Civ 536
12 Jan 1999
CA
Simon Brown LJ, Wilson J
Land
Mortgagor's application for leave to appeal against an order allowing the plaintiff lenders, Bristol & West, finally to execute a warrant for possession which they obtained long since.
[ Bailii ]
National Westminster Bank -v- Iqbal Abdulla Bhatti and Gertrude Margaret Bhatti [1999] EWCA Civ 561
13 Jan 1999
CA
Land
Appeal against mortgage possession order.
[ Bailii ]
Valerie Ethel Violet Pitman -v- Barclays Bank Plc [1999] EWCA Civ 585
15 Jan 1999
CA
Equity, Land
Equitable set-off.
[ Bailii ]
Manchester Airport Plc -v- Dutton and others [1999] EWCA Civ 596; [2000] 1 QB 133
18 Jan 1999
CA
Land

[ Bailii ]
Micro Leisure Limited -v- County Properties & Developments Limited and Keeper of the Registers of Scotland [1999] ScotCS 25
19 Jan 1999
SCS
Lord Hamilton
Scotland, Land
Link[s] omitted
Susan Maher -v- Shaharukh Nazir Selma Nazir [1999] EWCA Civ 632
21 Jan 1999
CA
Land, Litigation Practice
Application for security for costs.
Link[s] omitted
Collier -v- Tugwell [1999] EWCA Civ 645
22 Jan 1999
CA
Lord Justice Simon Brown, Mr Justice Wilson
Land, Trusts
The parties were joint owners as tenants in common in equity of land. Each appealed orders with regard to its sale, and the division of the proceeds. The parties had bought the property intending to cohabit. They had contributed unevenly, and the claimant had subsequently contributed to repay part of the capital of the mortgage. The parties had in effect agreed that the claimant would buy the respondent's interest. Held: The maths were relatively simple. The judge had kept a close but not unfair control over mutual cross examination by two litigants in person. The property had been valued at less than the purchase price. It was wrong to allow the defendant to avoid the risk of his investment. Any error in valuation was balanced by the judges failure to require to be taken into account the costs of a sale. Appeal dismissed.
Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 14
Link[s] omitted
Prudential Assurance Company Limited -v- Waterloo Real Estate Inc [1999] EWCA Civ 642
22 Jan 1999
CA
Land, Limitation Casemap
1 Cites

Where title to land was to be established by adverse possession, the claim had to be unequivocal only in the sense that the intention to possess was clear to the world. It was unnecessary for the dispossessed party to know of the title he lost.
Link[s] omitted
Al-Sabah -v- Ali and Others [1999] EWHC 840 (Ch); [1999] EG 11
22 Jan 1999
ChD
Ferris J
Torts - Other, Land, Legal Professions, Professional Negligence Casemap
1 Cites
The claimant alleged the fraudulent transfer of properties by use of a forged power of attorney. Held. The power was fraudulent. Solicitors had acted under the instructions of the agent. The court referred to the Law Society's practice guidance after Penn and said "If instructions come to a solicitor not from the client himself but from a third party claiming to represent the client, the solicitor needs to take special care to satisfy himself that the client wishes him to act, by seeking the client personally or obtaining written confirmation from the client or taking some other step which is sufficient, in the circumstances, to show that the client wants the solicitor to act for him in the matter in question." Nor had the solicitors verified that the vendor had received the proceeds of sale. They were liable in negligence. Any indemnity from the Land Registry would be reduced according to the contribution from the solicitors.
Land Registration Act 1925 83(2)
Link[s] omitted
Freeguard -v- Rogers; CA 26-Jan-1999
Halifax -v- Lucie Maame Ekeleba Blay, Ekua Yvonne Bentsi-Enchill [1999] EWCA Civ 686
1 Feb 1999
CA
Chadwick, Laws LJJ
Land
Appeal against mortgage possession order.
Link[s] omitted
Halifax -v- Taffs; CA 02-Feb-1999
Walter Frederick Scutt -v- John Lomax [1999] EWCA Civ 717
4 Feb 1999
CA
Judge, Tuckey LJJ
Damages, Land
1 Citers
The claimant sought damages for trespass to two plots comprising about one fifth of an acre. They had over many years gardened it and tended it. The defendant had bulldozed the entire area. Held: The diminution in the value of the land was not an appropriate measure of damages in respect of this trespass. The court considered the measure of damages in trespass: "Where trespass by the defendant has caused damage to the claimant's land, the claimant may be entitled to the diminution in the value of the land or the reasonable cost of reasonable reinstatement, or in some cases a figure in between. All will depend on the circumstances of the particular case, but the authorities seem to me to establish the following general propositions.
1. The claimant will ordinarily be entitled to the diminution in value of the property unless the reasonable claimant would have reinstated the land at less cost.
2. The claimant who has in fact reinstated the property will ordinarily be entitled to recover the reasonable cost of doing so, even if the cost is greater that the diminution in value, unless he has acted unreasonably in reinstating the property.
3. Where the claimant has not yet reinstated the property, (subject to 4 and 5 below) he will ordinarily be entitled to recover the reasonable cost of reasonable reinstatement, even if it is greater than the diminution in value.
4. In assessing what is the reasonable cost of reasonable reinstatement, the court will consider whether the amount awarded is objectively fair; that is fair to both parties. In particular the court will not award a sum which is out of proportion to the benefit conferred on the claimant.
5. In assessing what steps it is reasonable to take by way of reasonable reinstatement, the court will take account of the cost of the reinstatement. Thus it may not be reasonable fully to reinstate the property because the cost of doing so may not be justified. All will depend on the circumstances of the particular case."
Link[s] omitted
Manchester Airport Plc -v- Lee Dutton and others [1999] EWCA Civ 844
23 Feb 1999
CA
Laws LJ, Chadwick LJ
Land Casemap
1 Cites

The claimant sought an order requiring delivery of possession of land occupied by the respondent objectors. They needed to remove trees from the land in order to construct a runway on their own adjacent land. The claimant had been granted a licence to enter on the land to remove the trees. The respondents said the claimant had insufficient interest to found the request for the order. Held: The objectors appeal failed. (Lord Chadwick dissenting) The National Trust could not grant exclusive possession to the claimant. "There is no doubt that a licensee may have a right to exclusive possession without thereby becoming a tenant - for example where the licence is gratuitous - but that will depend on the terms of the licence. " A letter from the National Trust could not assist: "The legal effect of a written document is a matter for the court which has to give effect to its terms. The “right as licensor to enter should the need arise” is not reserved in any express term of the licence; it exists, in my view, because the licence grants no right of possession which would enable the airport company to exclude the National Trust. The right to control access to and egress from the site is not mentioned in the licence; nor is there, in the licence, any mention of responsibility for security measures. "
Laws LJ: "in this I hear the rattle of mediaeval chains." The historical law of ejectment was based upon a fiction: "the remedy by way of ejectment was by definition concerned with the case where the plaintiff asserted a better title to the land than the defendant; and the fictions, first introduced in the latter half of the sixteenth century and in effect maintained until 1852, were designed to cut out the consequences of pleading points that might be taken if the plaintiff did not plead his case as to the relevant legal relationships with complete accuracy. " and "there is a logical mistake in the notion that because ejectment was only available to estate owners, possession cannot be available to licensees who do not enjoy de facto occupation. The mistake inheres in this: if the action for ejectment was by definition concerned only with the rights of estate owners, it is necessarily silent upon the question, what relief might be available to a licensee. The limited and specific nature of ejectment means only that it was not available to a licensee; it does not imply the further proposition, that no remedy by way of possession can now be granted to a licensee not in occupation. Nowadays there is no distinct remedy of ejectment; a plaintiff sues for an order of possession, whether he is himself in occupation or not. " The court today has ample power to grant a remedy to a licensee which will protect but not exceed his legal rights granted by the licence. If, as here, that requires an order for possession, the spectre of history (which, in the true tradition of the common law, ought to be a friendly ghost) does not stand in the way. The law of ejectment has no voice in the question; it cannot speak beyond its own limits. "
Rules of tHe Supreme Curt Order 113 Rule 1 - Common Law Procedure Act 1852
Link[s] omitted
Manchester Airport Plc -v- Dutton; Longmire; Stoddard; Maile and Persons Unknown [1999] EWCA Civ 897; [2000] 1 QB 133
4 Mar 1999
CA
Chadwick, Laws LJJ
Land Casemap


The claimant wished to construct a new runway on its own land, and it was necessary to carry out works, namely, that trees on nearby land should be lopped or felled so that they would not constitute an obstruction to the flight path. The claimant had been granted a licence by the National Trust to enter and occupy this land for these purpose. The purpose for which the licence is granted is to enable the works agreed between the parties . . to be carried out. The Defendants objected to what was proposed and, without any licence from anyone, set up encampments on the land so as to make it difficult or impossible to lop and fell the trees. The Claimants started possession proceedings under RSC Order 113. Held: A temporary stay was granted. A licensee, prevented by the acts of a squatter from exercising the rights of occupation, given by the licence, was entitled to apply for possession even though he himself might not be in occupation under the licence.
Chadwick LJ said: "possession is synonymous . . with exclusive occupation - that is to say occupation (or a right to occupy) to the exclusion of all others, including the owner or other person with superior title."
Link[s] omitted
Director of Public Prosecutions -v- Jones and Lloyd; HL 04-Mar-1999
Woolls -v- Powling [1999] EWCA Civ 751
9 Mar 1999
CA
Land Casemap


A plan attached to a conveyance for identification purposes only' could still be used, when clear, to determine just where the boundary lay. If the transfer is clear, extrinsic evidence cannot be used to clarify the precise boundary.
The combined expressions used in a conveyance to import a plan 'for identification purposes only' and 'more particularly identified on' were used. The judge had admitted extrinsic evidence, that is oral evidence, as to discussions between the parties regarding the boundary wall prior to the conveyance. Held: the appeal was allowed. The plan did not conflict with the description of the property in the conveyance and so the judge had been in error in admitting this extrinsic evidence.
Link[s] omitted
Bristol & West Plc -v- Victor Babatunde Sunday Olaku and Victoria Edith Olaku [1999] EWCA Civ 937
10 Mar 1999
CA
Land
[ Bailii ]
Okolie -v- Barclays Bank Plc [1999] EWCA Civ 943
10 Mar 1999
CA
Land
[ Bailii ]
Halifax Plc -v- David Gopee and Lyn Gopee [1999] EWCA Civ 980
15 Mar 1999
CA
Land
Application for leave to appeal against dismissal of request for suspension of possession order made in mortgage possession proceedings.
Link[s] omitted
Stevens -v- Dorset County Council [1999] EWHC Admin 233
16 Mar 1999
Admn
Land
Public right of way
Highways Act 1980 116
Link[s] omitted
Ian Martin Pittaway; Smith and Williamson Trust Corporation Limited -v- Mandex Limited [1999] EWCA Civ 1020
18 Mar 1999
CA
Land
Link[s] omitted
Skerritts of Nottingham Limited -v- Secretary of State for Environment, Transport and Regions, Harrow London Borough Council; Admn 22-Mar-1999
Alexander and Costello -v- Halifax Plc [1999] EWCA Civ 1046
22 Mar 1999
CA
Land
Link[s] omitted
Alan Wibberley Building Ltd -v- Insley; HL 24-Mar-1999
Wynn Realisations Ltd -v- Vogue Holdings Inc [1999] STC 524; [1999] BVC 245; [1999] EWCA Civ 1087; [1999] BTC 5224
24 Mar 1999
CA
Morritt LJ
Land, VAT

Morritt LJ said: "First, VAT, where payable, is charged by reference to the value of the supply which, when in money, is to be taken to be such amount as with the addition of the VAT is equal to the consideration: the price is VAT inclusive. This is apparent from section 19(2) of the 1994 Act. It is for that reason that where VAT is not to be included, the parties normally makes express reference to the fact that the price does not include VAT by reference to a number of formulae, of which "exclusive of VAT" is perhaps the most common."
Link[s] omitted
Abbey National Mortgages Plc -v- Powell [1999] EWCA Civ 1074
24 Mar 1999
CA
Land
Link[s] omitted
Governor and Company of the Bank of Scotland -v- Brunswick Development (1987) Ltd and Another [1999] UKHL 16
24 Mar 1999
HL
Land
(Scotland) The grantor of a document was the principal under a deed, not the signatory, where these were different people. The right to rectification was decided accordingly.
Requirements of Writing (Scotland) Act 1995 Sch 2
Link[s] omitted
Barker -v- Johnson and Johnson [1999] EWCA Civ 1088
25 Mar 1999
CA
Land
Link[s] omitted
Locabail (UK) Ltd and Another -v- Waldorf Investment Corporation and Others
31 Mar 1999
ChD
Banking, Land Casemap


A consent to a mortgage on a property, allowed a bank to substitute a second charge for the first, without the owners consent, but this was limited to the extent and value of the first charge. There was no argument to limit the effect of the second charge to an equitable charge.
Anne Hyde Earnshaw; Marion Robinson and Lucy Hyde Fielden -v- Josephine Hyde Hartley [1999] EWCA Civ 1141; [2000] Ch 155
31 Mar 1999
CA
Lord Justice Nourse Lord Justice Buxton And Sir Christopher Staughton
Land, Wills and Probate, Limitation
1 Cites

An administrator de son tort, who was also a beneficiary, held the estate property on trust, and so could not establish adverse possession against the estate during the period of trusteeship. He held a sufficient interest in the assets already. A delay in the application for the grant did not apply where time had not in any event begun to run before the application
Limitation Act 1980 Sch 1 Para 9 - Administration of Estates Act 1925 9
[ Bailii ]
Target Holdings Ltd -v- Priestley and Another
8 Apr 1999
ChD
Land, Contract
An oral contract by which a lender agreed to accept repayments of arrears under a mortgage at a certain rate was valid in law despite non-compliance with the section. It was however a contract of disposition, not an executory contract and not caught. A compromise of repayments under a mortgage was valid despite lack of formality.
Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 2
Berkshire Capital Funding Limited -v- Dennis David Street and Barker Nationwide Building Society [1999] EWCA Civ 1158
14 Apr 1999
CA
Land
[ Bailii ]
John Hanson -v- South West Electricity Board [1999] EWCA Civ 1164
14 Apr 1999
CA
Land, Contract
No obligation on seller's solicitor to provide completion statement.
[ Bailii ]
Alliance and Leicester Plc -v- John Sidney Godolphin [1999] EWCA Civ 1157
14 Apr 1999
CA
Banking, Land
Link[s] omitted
Northern Rock Plc -v- Vijesh Pattni [1999] EWCA Civ 1206
19 Apr 1999
CA
Roch, Otton LJJ
Land
Application for permission to appeal against mortgagee's possession order.
Link[s] omitted
Kathleen Alexandra Loder -v- Timothy Roger Gaden; Vera Anne Gaden and Thomas Gaden [1999] EWCA Civ 1213
20 Apr 1999
CA
Land Casemap
1 Cites
Extent of public right of way.
[ Bailii ]
Leeds Permanent Building Society -v- Abdul Khaliq and Somirun Nessa Khaliq [1999] EWCA Civ 1237
22 Apr 1999
CA
Land
Link[s] omitted
Etridge -v- Pritchard Englefield (Merged With Robert Gore and Co) [1999] EWCA Civ 1273; [1999] EWCA Civ 1280
28 Apr 1999
CA
Land, Equity, Banking, Legal Professions, Undue Influence
Link[s] omitted
Chassagnou and Others -v- France; ECHR 29-Apr-1999
City and Country Investments Limited -v- Osborne and Another [1999] EWCA Civ 1347
6 May 1999
CA
Land
[ Bailii ]
Jones -v- Stones [1999] EWCA Civ 1379; [1999] 1 WLR 1749
11 May 1999
CA
Aldous LJ
Land, Limitation Casemap

No defence of acquiescence or estoppel arose from a failure by a land owner to pursue a complaint. Such a defence could only be established by some positive act of encouragement or allowance by him. The heart of the action lay in the allowance of a belief to develop as to the rightness of the position.
Link[s] omitted
Philip Richard Roberts, Haf Wynne Roberts -v- Thomas John Roberts, Margaret Sylvia Roberts; CA 12-May-1999
Anneliese Kathe West and Harry William West -v- Peter Llewelyn Sharp [1999] EWCA Civ 1292
12 May 1999
CA
Mummery LJ, Colman J
Land
1 Cites
A deed granted a right of way 40 ft wide, but the land owner narrowed the area of land over which the easement was enjoyed. The easement dominant owner did not object for many years. Held: The deed was clear, and the original extent of the right remained, but there had been no substantial interference to justify an order either for an injunction or damages.
Mummery LJ said: "Not every interference with an easement, such as a right of way, is actionable. There must be a substantial interference with the enjoyment of it. There is no actionable interference with a right of way if it can be substantially and practically exercised as conveniently after as before the occurrence of the alleged obstruction. Thus, the grant of a right of way in law in respect of every part of a defined area does not involve the proposition that the grantee can in fact object to anything done on any part of the area which would obstruct passage over that part. He can only object to such activities, including obstruction, as substantially interfere with the exercise of the defined right as for the time being is reasonably required by him."
Link[s] omitted
National Westminster Home Loans -v- Nadeem Khan Ghazala Khan [1999] EWCA Civ 1395
12 May 1999
CA
Aldous LJ, Tuckey LJ
Land
Appeal against refusal of suspension of warrant for possession.
Link[s] omitted
Mean Machines Limited -v- Blackheath Leisure (Carousel) Limited [1999] EWCA Civ 1408
13 May 1999
CA
Contract, Land
Link[s] omitted
Lloyds Bank Plc-v- Terence John Palfrey [1999] EWCA Civ 1419
14 May 1999
CA
Land
Application for stay of mortgage possession proceedings.
Link[s] omitted
Mahmood Assari -v- Nicola Wilson [1999] EWCA Civ 1425
17 May 1999
CA
Land
[ Bailii ]
Green & Another -v- Wheatley [1999] EWCA Civ 1442
19 May 1999
CA
Stuart Smith LJ, Laws LJ, Jonathan Parker LJ
Land, Limitation
1 Cites
Where a garage had been built upon land, and allowed to stay there for over twenty years, title had been acquired by adverse possession, and a right of way which might previously have existed over the land, had also been lost.
Link[s] omitted
Lloyds Bank Plc -v- Selmah Tulsidas and Deepak Tulsidas [1999] EWCA Civ 1437
19 May 1999
CA
Land
Ex parte application by the applicant for permission to appeal - suspension of warrant for possession.
Link[s] omitted
Andrew Parker -v- Graham Hutchings [1999] EWCA Civ 1444
20 May 1999
CA
Land
[ Bailii ]
Regina -v- Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration ex parte Balchin and others [1999] EWHC Admin 484
24 May 1999
Admn
Dyson J
Land, Administrative Casemap
1 Cites
[ Bailii ]
Denty and Another -v- Hussein [1999] 96 (24) LSG 40
26 May 1999
ChD
D L Mackie QC
Land, Limitation
The parties owned adjoining premises. The plaintiffs sought relief, alledging that their rights of way had been infringed. The defendant had erected fences and gates across a service road. Held: Where a party erected a fence obstructing a right of way, the court was able to differentiate between rights of way by foot and vehicular rights of way. The right of way by car had begun only within the prior 20 years. That particular right of way could be enforced by injunction, but not for the extent of use claimed.
Prescription Act 1832
Robert Burns Doreen Burns -v- Edward Morton [1999] EWCA Civ 1514; [1999] 3 All ER 646
27 May 1999
CA
Land
1 Cites

Link[s] omitted
Berkshire Capital Funding Ltd -v- Street et Al
27 May 1999
CA
Land
Rights of a first lender to grant tenancies must be respected, and override the rights of a second mortgagee to possession. A mortgagee in possession has full power to grant a tenancy. A mortgagee is not limited by the section.
Law of Property Act 1925 99
Elias Hosany and Sheerinbai Hosany -v- Peter Lo [1999] EWCA Civ 1505
27 May 1999
CA
Land
Appeal against possession order in landlord and tenant action.
Link[s] omitted
Andrew Wilson and others -v- Against a Decision of Lands Tribunal for Scotland [1999] ScotCS 137
8 Jun 1999
SCS
Scotland, Land
[ Bailii ]
Regina -v- West London County Court ex parte Christopher Moore [1999] EWCA Civ 1538
9 Jun 1999
CA
Land
Mortgage possession proceedings.
Link[s] omitted
Kenneth Albert Clarke; Marie Elizabeth Clarke -v- Victor L Oates and Maliga Deri Oates [1999] EWCA Civ 1552
10 Jun 1999
CA
Brooke, May, Laws LJJ
Land, Contract Casemap
1 Cites
Boundary dispute
[ Bailii ]
David Jacob Waldner -v- Parochial Church Council of Darby Green and Winchester Diocesan Board of Finance [1999] EWCA Civ 160
17 Jun 1999
CA
Lord Justice Otton, and Lord Justice Robert Walker
Land
The applicant sought leave to appeal out of time against the dismissal of his claim as an abuse of process, being an attempt to relitigate a lost case. He claimed to have had an interest in a house formerly occupied as a matrimonial property. The house had been purchased by the defendants. A land charge had been incorrectly registered. Held: The land charge was not binding unless registered, even if the defendants had had knowledge of it, and the matrimonial court orders also prevented his application. Leave refused.
Land Charges Act 1972 4(8) - Matrimonial Homes Act 1983 1
[ Bailii ]
Garrow -v- Society of Lloyd's [1999] BPIR 668
18 Jun 1999
ChD
Jacob J
Land, Insolvency Casemap
1 Citers
Lloyds sought to claim against the Names on a 'pay now, sue later' clause. Held: The power to order a stay of execution for possession remained and could be exercised in an appropriate case even though a cross-claim under which it was requested, could have been raised at an earlier stage in the proceedings. There was no hard rule of law to prevent such a request.
Jacob J said: "The other point urged upon me was the 'pay now sue later' clause. Mr Garrow had agreed that if he was to bring a cross claim he would nonetheless pay the claim at once. This is of course true, and if he had the means then I have no doubt that he should be made to do so. But I am concerned with whether the draconian effect of the bankruptcy should be imposed when he may have a perfectly good cross claim. It seems to me that this would be disproportionate, given the fact that with the Commercial Court decision likely soon, there is no tangible benefit to be had."
London Borough of Bromley -v- Morritt; CA 21-Jun-1999
Crest Homes (South West) Limited -v- Gloucestershire County Council [1999] EWCA Civ 1642
22 Jun 1999
CA
Nourse LJ, Swinton Thomas LJ, Mummery LJ
Land
Link[s] omitted
Regina -v- Secretary of State for Environment, Transport and Regions ex parte Dorset County Council [1999] EWHC Admin 582; [2000] JPL 396
22 Jun 1999
Admn
Dyson J
Land
1 Cites
1 Citers
The court was asked to review a decision not to confirm a public right of way. The court considered whether the landowner had to show some overt act as evidence of his lack of intention to dedicate the land. Dyson J said: "On the face of it, the language of the proviso is straightforward. All that is required is that there be sufficient evidence of lack of intention to dedicate. Coming to the matter untutored by previous authority, one may be forgiven for thinking that what Parliament intended was that the tribunal of fact simply decide as a matter of fact whether there is or is not sufficient evidence of intention to dedicate…I accept that as a matter of fact the tribunal of fact will rarely, if ever, find that there is sufficient evidence of lack of intention to dedicate in the absence of overt and contemporaneous acts on the part of the owner. I do not, however, think that such a requirement can be spelled out of section 31(1) as a matter of construction."
Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 31(1)
Link[s] omitted
Mahmood, Mahmood -v- Rashid and Jabeen [1999] EWCA Civ 1672
24 Jun 1999
CA
Land
Link[s] omitted
Yaxley -v- Gotts and Another; CA 24-Jun-1999
Regina -v- Oxfordshire County Council and Another, Ex Parte Sunningwell Parish Council [1999] UKHL 28; [2000] 1 AC 335; [1999] 3 ALL ER 385; [1999] 3 WLR 160
25 Jun 1999
HL
Lord Browne-Wilkinson, Lord Steyn, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Hobhouse of Wood-borough, Lord Millett
Land, Limitation Casemap
1 Cites
1 Citers
When setting out to establish that a piece of land has become a village green with rights of common, the tests are similar to those used in the law of prescription and adverse possession. Accordingly, there is no need to establish a belief in those using the rights asserted beyond that the use is as of right. 'As of right' does not require that the inhabitants should believe themselves to have a legal right. For prescription purposes under the Prescription Act 1832, the Rights of Way Act 1932 and the 1965 Act "as of right" means nec vi, nec clam, nec precario, that is, "not by force, nor stealth, nor the licence of the owner" The purpose of the 1965 Act was "to preserve and improve common land and town and village greens. " "Any legal system must have rules of prescription which prevent the disturbance of long-established de facto enjoyment."
Commons Registration Act 1965 13(b)
[ House of Lords ] - [ Bailii ]
Andrew Haden Parrott; Emily van Evera -v- John Stephen Battye and Mahrokh Fariba Battye [1999] EWCA Civ 1693
28 Jun 1999
CA
Land, Contract
Link[s] omitted
Jelson Ltd -v- Derby City Council; ChD 30-Jun-1999
Hepworth Building Products -v- Coal Authority [1999] EWCA Civ 1749
2 Jul 1999
CA
Costs, Land
An offer to settle, expressly open only until the first day of the hearing at the Lands Tribunal could have no significance in the context of a re-hearing ordered by the Court of Appeal some years later. The early offer including the limitation had not been revived, and had no continuing effect in costs.
Lands Tribunal Rules 1996 (1996 No 1022)
[ Bailii ]
Regina -v- Braintree District Council ex parte Halls [1999] EWHC Admin 626
2 Jul 1999
Admn
Jackson J
Local Government, Land Casemap

1 Citers
Where a local authority had sold a property to a tenant, and the tenant later came back to request the release from one of the covenants given on the sale, the council was free to charge an appropriate sum for that release. It was not a covenant within the deed entitling the council to make a charge, but simply that the covenant restricting the use of the plot to one private dwelling-house was entirely valid.
Housing Act 1985 Part V Sch 6 Par 6
Link[s] omitted
John Boissevain -v- Karl Lindhagen [1999] EWCA Civ 1767
5 Jul 1999
CA
Land
[ Bailii ]
Evans -v- James (Administratrix of the Estate of Thomas Hopkin Deceased) [1999] EWCA Civ 1759
5 Jul 1999
CA
Land, Contract Casemap

Before the parties called evidence, and having read the papers, the court considered that there was no real defence shown, and invited submissions. Negotiations for the grant of a tenancy had been terminated by the sudden illness of the proposed tenant. His family asserted a contract was concluded. Held. There was no prospect of upholding the assertion that the solicitor's actions bound his client landlord. In this case, and despite the absence of an application for summary judgment the judge had been right to raise the isue, and indeed it should have been raised earlier.
Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989
[ Bailii ]
A E Reynolds Plc -v- Raymond Pratt; Carol Pratt and Leonard John Arboine [1999] EWCA Civ 1785
8 Jul 1999
CA
Land, Insolvency, Trusts
[ Bailii ]
Timothy Ellis -v- London Borough of Lambeth (1999) 32 HLR 596; [1999] EWCA Civ 1807
9 Jul 1999
CA
Lord Justice Swinton Thomas Mr Justice Wilson
Land, Limitation Casemap
1 Cites
1 Citers
A squatter claiming possession of land as against a local authority should not have his claim defeated because he had not completed a form which would lead to payment of community charge to the authority. His possession was not thereby made secret, and nor did he represent that nobody was in occupation of the property. The failure to complete the form could not become an estoppel against the claimant.
[ Bailii ]
Peter A R Hamilton -v- Thomas E Weston [1999] EWCA Civ 1823
13 Jul 1999
CA
Land
Application for leave to appeal - boundary dispute.
Link[s] omitted
Kashif Mallick -v- Liverpool City Council [1999] EWCA Civ 1832
14 Jul 1999
CA
Land Casemap

Where payment of compensation for the compulsory purchase of land was delayed, the interest set down by the Act as prescribed from time to time was the only compensation payable for that delay. The claimant's losses in this case by way of loss of rental income had already been provided for in the calculation of the capital sum payable.
Land Compensation Act 1961 52
Link[s] omitted
Regina -v- Leeds City Council ex parte Maloney [1999] EWHC Admin 694
15 Jul 1999
Admn
Tucker J
Land
The claimant gypsy sought judicial review of a decision by the Council to proceed to enforce a possession order in respect of land on which she was encamped.
Link[s] omitted
Stanton, Mills; Mills -v- Blackwell and Blackwell; CA 15-Jul-1999
Shariffa Abdul Gani and Nargis Abdul Gani -v- Salim Abdul Gani [1999] EWCA Civ 1862
15 Jul 1999
CA
Land
Link[s] omitted
Mcareavey and Another -v- Coal Authority [1999] EWCA Civ 1882
19 Jul 1999
CA
Land
A Lands Tribunal awarding compensation after completion of repairs following subsidence arising from mining works is not restricted to awarding damages for the delay in completion for the subsidence, but may also award damages for any diminution in the value of the property.
Coal Mining (Subsidence) Act 1957
Link[s] omitted
Delaware Mansions Limited, Flecksun Limited -v- The Lord Mayor and Citizens of The City of Westminster [1999] EWCA Civ 1903
21 Jul 1999
CA
Beldam, Pill, Thorpe LJJ
Land, Negligence, Nuisance Casemap
1 Citers
Link[s] omitted
Woolwich Building Society -v- Isaac Tuvyahu and Shoulamit Tuvyahu [1999] EWCA Civ 1975
26 Jul 1999
CA
Land
Leave to appeal granted.
Link[s] omitted
Abubakare Olayiwola Shewu ; Salimot Adetola Shewu and Richmond Upon Thames London Borough Council -v- London Borough of Hackney [1999] EWCA Civ 1990
28 Jul 1999
CA
Land
When assessing the value of land compulsorily purchased, the value was that agreed at the date of entry. The existence of a mortgage was not relevant. The authority had a power, but no duty, to repay any mortgage loan, and were not accountable for any interest accruing for any delay. That loss did not flow from the compulsory purchase order.
Link[s] omitted
Alexander and Costello -v- Halifax Plc [1999] EWCA Civ 1991
28 Jul 1999
CA
Land
Link[s] omitted
Metropolitan Resources Limited -v- British Railways Board and William Lucas Charles Batchelor [1999] EWCA Civ 2020
29 Jul 1999
CA
Land, Litigation Practice
Link[s] omitted
Margery Hale -v- Norfolk County Council [1999] EWCA Civ 2050
30 Jul 1999
CA
Land
Application for leave to appeal. Whether land formned part of garden or of highway.
Link[s] omitted
Akobuike Udeozo -v- Gertrude Odogwu [1999] EWCA Civ 2033
30 Jul 1999
CA
Land, Trusts
[ Bailii ]
Jelson Ltd -v- Derbyshire County Council [1999] 3 EGLR 91; (2000) JPL 203
1 Aug 1999

Land, Planning Casemap


Section 2 of the 1989 Act had to bite at the point where a party could be compelled, in certain circumstances, which could or could not come about, to sell or dispose of an interest in land. The agreement here contained in effect an option for the council to nominate a housing association to which Jelson was required to convey land at a price and on conditions contained in the schedules. As the relevant parts of the agreement did, but for the section, commit Jelson to convey the property, they were of no effect since they lacked the signature of the purchaser.
Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 2 - Town and Country Planning Act 1990 106
Doreen Edna Miles -v- Secretary of State for Environment and Royal Borough of Kingston Upon Thames [1999] EWCA Civ 2078
11 Aug 1999
CA
Land
Link[s] omitted
Carroll -v- Manek and Another
18 Aug 1999
ChD
Land, Limitation
A person who acquired title to land by adverse possession took only the title against which his possession was adverse. Where the land was charged, he acquired only the equity of redemption, and where his occupation was of part only, his right was subject to the entire mortgage. If he wanted the land free of it, the entire loan was to be discharged.
Banque National De Paris Plc -v- Montman Ltd and others
2 Sep 1999
ChD
Land
A person claiming to be 'interested' in property had to demonstrate either some proprietary interest or similar or that he was directly affected by a charging order. An unsecured creditor could not take priority over the liquidator in seeking to overturn a charging order predating the winding up.
Charging Orders Act 1979
Woolwich Plc -v- Lorna Margaret Gomm, Ian Graham Fairbairn [1999] EWCA Civ 1989
21 Sep 1999
CA
Land, Undue Influence
A borrower took out a loan under undue influence. The test of whether the lender was fixed with notice of this was an objective one. The lender was fixed with the knowledge of its agent solicitor, but whether it was so fixed was not dependent upon the terms of the particular appointment of that solicitor agent.
Law of Property Act 1925 199
Link[s] omitted
Mortgage Corporation -v- Lambert & Co (A Firm) and Another
11 Oct 1999
ChD
Limitation, Land Casemap
1 Cites

Estimates of the real values of houses which had been taken as security for loans were not sufficiently precise to forewarn a lender of the damage resulting from earlier negligent valuations, and accordingly the lender was not fixed with notice by the estimates, and time did not begin to run against them.
Limitation Act 1980 14A(10)
Palmer and Another -v- Bowman and Another [2000] 1 WLR 842
27 Oct 1999
CA
Land

There is no easement of right for an owner of higher land for water naturally to drain off over neighbouring lower land, and nor was an easement required. The doctrine of lost modern grant need not be applied. Although the higher land owner had no right, the owner of the lower land had no right to complain of such run off. The owner of the higher land had no right to come on to the other land to improve drainage, nor to require the owner of the lower land to maintain drains. The natural flow of water is an incident of the ownership of the land and is inherent in it, and as such is not capable of being the subject-matter of an easement.
Farrell -v- First National Bank Plc; LT 01-Nov-1999
Nutt and Another -v- Read and Another (1999) 32 HLR 716
3 Nov 1999
CA
Chadwick LJ, Thorpe and Morritt LJJ
Land, Landlord and Tenant

The parties had contracted for the letting of land and transfer as in personam of a chalet erected upon it. The parties having completed the deals could not then agree what was to have been paid. Held: The first agreement was void for common mistake and that the second should be set aside or rescinded in equity. They had both acted in ignorance of the chalet having become part of the land, and that though a statutory tenancy had come into being, it was right to unravel the arrangement even after some considerable time and after improvements.
Housieng Act 1988
Kenneth Starling -v- Lloyds TSB Bank plc
10 Nov 1999
CA
29 October 1999
Banking, Land Casemap

1 Citers
The setting aside of the statutory power of a mortgagor in possession to grant a lease, by the mortgage itself did not create in the lender a duty of good faith properly to consider a request from the mortgagor for permission to let the property. It was wrong to attempt to import such a duty from a very different area of law.
Law of Property Act 1925 99
Holder and Others -v- APC Supperstone and Others [2001] 1 All ER 473; [1999] EWHC Ch 189
24 Nov 1999
ChD
Land, Insolvency Casemap
1 Citers
Tenants obtained a charging order against their landlord, and, after his bankruptcy, incurred substantial costs defending their charge against other claimants. The trustee declined to allow payment of the costs. Held: The costs were properly payable under the Act. The charge operated also as an equitable charge, and such a charge would carry the costs of defending the chargee's rights. A charging order covers not only the judgment debt, but also future interest on the debt and "all costs charges and expenses reasonably and properly incurred in enforcing or preserving (the) security."
Charging Orders Act 1979 1(1) 3(4)
Link[s] omitted
Monsanto Plc -v- Tilly and Others; CA 30-Nov-1999
Lewin (Trading Standards Officer) -v- Barratt Homes Ltd
1 Dec 1999
QBD
Crime, Land
New houses were advertised for sale. Pictures of the house were available, with some disclaimers as to minor variations, but the houses actually built had greater deviation. The builder claimed the statements were not descriptions of existing properties, but they knew they could not build the houses as described. Held: The case was remitted to the magistrates with a direction to convict.
Property Misdescriptions Act 1991
Margaret Dunlop Harvey -v- Mactaggart & Mickel Limited [1999] ScotCS 286
2 Dec 1999
IHCS
Lord McCluskey and Lord Caplan and Lord Osborne
Scotland, Land
Link[s] omitted
Grindal and Another -v- Hooper and Others
17 Dec 1999
ChD
Land, Equity
A conveyance to joint tenants required any severance of the joint tenancy, to be recorded by endorsing the notice of severance on the transfer. The joint tenancy was purported to be severed, but no notice was endorsed. The failure to endorse the notice could not defeat the validity of the severance. The purpose of the clause was to assist any purchaser in obtaining good title, and was not intended to limit the effect of any severance as between the tenants.
Birmingham Midshires Mortgage Services Ltd -v- Sabherwal ( CA Unreported, 17 December 1999
17 Dec 1999
CA
Robert Walker LJ
Land Casemap
1 Citers
An equity arising from a proprietary estoppel is not an "equitable interest" capable of being overreached pursuant to section 2 of the Law of Property Act 1925.
Law of Property Act 1925 2
Risbylane Ltd, Re [1999] EWLands LRA_25_1999
21 Dec 1999
LT
Land
[ Bailii ]
Risbylane Ltd, Re [1999] EWLands LRA_25_1999
21 Dec 1999
LT
Land
Link[s] omitted
Hamden Homes Ltd LP/38/1999
31 Dec 1999
LT
Land
Link[s] omitted
Anthony Ronald Peacock -v- Lesley Susan Bartolomeo LP/37/1999
31 Dec 1999
LT
Land
Link[s] omitted
Sita (Formerly Elenezer Mears (Sand Producers) Ltd) -v- Surrey County Council ACQ/129/1999
31 Dec 1999
LT
Land
Link[s] omitted
M J Waters, E L Waters, W N Waters, H D Preece, S H Preece, R Williams, S Waters -v- The Welsh Development Agency ACQ/93-97/1999; [2001] 1 EGLR 185
31 Dec 1999
LT
Land, Damages
1 Cites

Compulsory purchase - compensation
Link[s] omitted
W L & A P Prielipp -v- Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport -v- Regions (new version) ACQ/127/1999
31 Dec 1999
LT
Land
Link[s] omitted
T R James -v- Shropshire County Council ACQ/110/99
31 Dec 1999
LT
Land
[ LT ]
Ranks Leisure & Others -v- Castle Vale Housing Action Trust ACQ/168/1999
31 Dec 1999
LT
Land
Link[s] omitted
Dr Gaur Bushan Bhattacharjee -v- Blackburn with Darwen Borough Council ACQ/10/1999
31 Dec 1999
LT
Land
[ LT ]
Joseph R Richards and Joanne V Richards -v- Somerset County Council ACQ/23/1999
31 Dec 1999
LT
Land
[ LT ]
Joseph R Richards and Joanne V Richards -v- Somerset County Council ACQ/23/1999
31 Dec 1999
LT
Land
Link[s] omitted
David John Evans -v- Worcestershire County Council ACQ/26/1999
31 Dec 1999
LT
Land
Link[s] omitted
Pendle Borough Council ACQ/27/1999
31 Dec 1999
LT
Land
Link[s] omitted
Robert Ian Coupar -v- London Borough of Newham ACQ/59/1999
31 Dec 1999
LT
Land
Link[s] omitted
Unknown -v- Wolverhampton Metropolitan Borough Council ACQ/62/1999
31 Dec 1999
LT
Land
Link[s] omitted
WL & A P Prielipp -v- C Kennerly ACQ/127/1999; ACQ/127/1999
31 Dec 1999
LT
Land
[ LT ]
Anthony Whiting and Another -v- Wychavon District Council ACQ/90/1999
31 Dec 1999
LT
Land
Link[s] omitted
Davies -v- Murphy LP/32/1999
31 Dec 1999
LT
Land
Link[s] omitted
Unknown and Newport County Borough Council ACQ/102/1999
31 Dec 1999
LT
Land
Link[s] omitted
Old England Properties Ltd -v- Telford & Wrekin Council ACQ/111/1999
31 Dec 1999
LT
Land
Link[s] omitted
Alan Racheter -v- Basingstoke & Deane Borough Council ACQ/138/1999
31 Dec 1999
LT
Land
Link[s] omitted
The Executors of the Estate of the Right Honourable Herbert Robert Cayzer Baron Rotherwick -v- Oxfordshire County Council LCA/43/1999
31 Dec 1999
LT
Land
Link[s] omitted
Adam -v- Woking Borough Council LCA/88/1999
31 Dec 1999
LT
Land
[ LT ]
Gordon Charles Clarke -v- The Highways Agency LCA/92/1999
31 Dec 1999
LT
Land
Link[s] omitted
James Mooney -v- West Lindsey District Council LCA/98/1999
31 Dec 1999
LT
Land
Link[s] omitted
John H Smith -v- Highways Agency LCA/123/1999
31 Dec 1999
LT
Land
Link[s] omitted
Marcello Developments Limited LP/18/1999
31 Dec 1999
LT
Land
[ LT ]
The Girls Day School Trust (1872) LP/19/1999
31 Dec 1999
LT
Land
Link[s] omitted
R I Diggens, M H King, R H Cox -v- G A Cox LP/27/1999
31 Dec 1999
LT
Land Casemap
1 Citers
[ LT ]
Unknown, Tidmarsh Estate Ltd, Unknown -v- London Borough of Islington ACQ/79/1999
31 Dec 1999
LT
Land
Link[s] omitted

All information on this site is in general and summary form only. The content of any page on this site may be out of date and or incomplete, and you should not not rely directly upon it. Take direct professional legal advice which reflects your own particular situation.
Home |  lawindexpro |  Forum | 
| Two Doves Counselling | Faulty Flipper
Copyright and Database Rights: David Swarbrick 2012