Articles

Caroline Shea KC and Thomas Rothwell consider a decision of the Court of Appeal on incorrectly addressed notices.

• Caroline Shea KC
• Thomas Rothwell

There is an intense social and political debate in many parts of the United Kingdom at present, but in particular the upland areas of northern and north-west England, Scotland, Wales and the West Country, as to how the competing demands and objectives of agriculture, recreation and wildlife conservation should best be reconciled. This debate is perhaps at its sharpest and most intense around the concept of “re-wilding”: the circumstances in which conservation efforts should seek to return land to a more natural ecological state with a lesser degree of human intervention, including if necessary by reintroducing apex predators.

• Gavin Bennison

In this series of articles, we aim to highlight 3 of the most interesting cases in our field decided in the past month. This month: the scope of the jurisdiction to grant relief from forfeiture; an injunction relating to mooring rights; and the requirement of detrimental reliance in establishing a common intention constructive trust.

• Stephanie Tozer KC
• Fern Schofield

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, holding that a party claiming a subsequent increase in their equitable share as a result of a post-acquisition changed common intention must show detrimental reliance on the changed common intention. In this case there had been sufficient detrimental reliance.

• Elizabeth Fitzgerald
• Toby Boncey

Statutory consultation requirements may be dispensed with after a determination under s.27A of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (“the 1985 Act”) that service charges are payable only to the extent of the statutory cap.

• Toby Boncey