+44 (0)20 7353 2484 clerks@falcon-chambers.com

Articles

Witness actions – press on … or pause for breath? 26 March 2020

On 20 March 2020 the Lord Chief Justice issued guidance on the future conduct of trials, including a statement that hearings, including trials and witness action, should take place whenever possible, even if that meant that one, several, or all of the participants attended remotely. “Final hearings and hearings with contested evidence very shortly will inevitably be conducted using technology. Otherwise, there will be no hearings and access to justice will become a mirage.”

Read More...
Download: Witness actions – press on … or pause for breath?

CASE NOTE - Fearn & Ors v The Board of Trustees of the Tate Gallery 12 February 2020

[2020] EWCA Civ 104 Court of Appeal On Appeal from the High Court of Justice Chancery Division (Business and Property) Mann J [2019] EWHC 246

Read More...
Download: CASE NOTE - Fearn & Ors v The Board of Trustees of the Tate Gallery

The right to manage - when procedural slips are non-fatal (Lexham House RTM Company Ltd v European Investments & Development (Properties) Ltd) 14 January 2020

Property disputes analysis: Tricia Hemans examines an Upper Tribunal (UT) decision that when the appellant served the respondent freeholder of a block of flats with notice of its intention to acquire the right to manage the property it did not need, in order to comply with section 79(6) of the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 (CLRA 2002), to also serve notice on a second landlord of part of the property, which would not be affected by the appellant’s acquisition of the right.

Read More...
Download: The right to manage - when procedural slips are non-fatal (Lexham House RTM Company Ltd v European Investments & Development (Properties) Ltd)

Your flexible friend? Interim code rights (University of London v Cornerstone) 29 November 2019

This article considers a further decision on the Electronic Communications Code, in Schedule 3A to the Communications Act 2003. In University of London v Cornerstone Telecommunications Infrastructure Ltd, the Court of Appeal considered whether there was a right to survey to determine whether a prospective site was suitable for installation of electronic communications apparatus, and whether a right could be sought on an interim basis without additional rights being sought as well. The Court of Appeal held that a right to survey was embraced within the right under paragraph 3(d) of the Code, and that there was no need for rights to be sought on a final basis. Written by Oliver Radley-Gardner, who acted as junior counsel for the respondent.

Read More...

Refine Search