Unpacking the Case - Real Estate Law Podcast

In this newsflash episode hosts Richard and Lizzie discuss the business of tax dodging, something called box shifting which is people moving boxes around empty buildings to avoid paying business rates. Richard Snape examines the Court of Appeal decision in City of London Corporation v 48th Street Holdings Ltd and Principled Offsite Logistics Ltd. The case involves the controversial practice known as "box shifting", where temporary occupation of an empty property has been used to trigger a new period of empty rates relief. The Court of Appeal was asked to consider whether these arrangements amounted to genuine occupation or a rates avoidance scheme.Is it game over for box shifting? Richard breaks down the facts of the case, explains the court's reasoning and explores what the judgment means for landlords, owners, investors and anyone responsible for managing vacant commercial property. If you own, occupy or advise on commercial real estate, this is a decision you need to understand. Relevant cases:John Laing & Son Ltd v Assessment Committee for Kingswood Assessment Area [1949]R (Makro Properties Ltd) v Nuneaton and Bedworth Borough Council [2012]Sunderland City Council v Stirling Investment Properties LLP [2013]Principled Offsite Logistics Limited v Trafford Council and Others [2018]Hurstwood Properties (A) Ltd and others v Rossendale Borough Council and another [2021]Public Health England v Harlow District Council [2021]Southwark London Borough Council v Ludgate House Ltd [2020]Global 100 Ltd v Jimenez & Ors [2022]Kenya Aid Programme v Sheffield City Council [2013]Get in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

Who do you serve notice on when ownership has changed but Land Registry records haven't caught up?In this episode of Unpacking the Case, we explore the High Court's decision in Bennetts Courtyard Limited v Bennetts Courtyard Airspace Limited [2026] EWHC 1119 (Ch).The case involved a valuable airspace worth around £1.5 million, and an important problem known as the registration gap. This is a common issue as transfers of whole can take around 16-19 weeks for the Land Registry to process. A transfer of the freehold had completed, but the new owner had not yet been registered at HM Land Registry. Millions of applications hit the Land Registry’s system monthly, creating bottlenecks. When leaseholders served a collective enfranchisement notice, they served it on the equitable owner rather than the legally registered proprietor. The High Court confirmed that this was a fatal mistake.This episode highlights the significant consequences that can arise from getting the notice procedure wrong. Richard and Lizzie discuss what the decision means, why the distinction between legal and equitable ownership remains so important, and the steps that parties should take before serving statutory notices. Relevant Cases & Legislation:Pye v Stodday [2016]Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993East Lindsey District Council v Thompson (2001)Brown & Root Technology Ltd v Sun Alliance and London Assurance Co Ltd [1997]Sackville Property Select II (GP) No.1 Ltd & Anor v Robertson Taylor Insurance Brokers Ltd & Anor [2018]Baker v Craggs [2018]Get in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

Can a community stop a local pub being sold? Will councils face new restrictions when disposing of land? What are the proposed changes to Assets of Community Value (ACVs)?In this Q&A episode of Unpacking the Case, we answer your questions surrounding Assets of Community Value and the disposal of local authority land.Hosts Richard and Lizzie discuss ACVs and what community groups should be watching for as further legislation and guidance develops.Richard also explores the issues that arise when councils dispose of land, including the Crichel Down Rules, open space disposals, selling at an undervalue and the balance between obtaining best value and delivering wider social and environmental benefits. Whether you are a local authority, developer, landowner or community organisation, this episode provides some answers to your questions on this fast-moving area of law.Topics covered:Assets of Community Value (ACVs)Community right to buyMoratorium periods and disposal restrictionsValuation and compensationCrichel Down RulesLocal authority land disposalsOpen space and allotment landSocial value and best value considerationsGet in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

Where exactly is the boundary between neighbouring properties, and can an informal agreement between neighbours settle the issue? In this episode of Unpacking the Case, we explore Todd v Marsh [2026] EWHC 1701 (Ch), a decision that attracted national attention and provides valuable insight into how boundary disputes are approached by the courts. The case centres around a dog and deer proof fence that was moved by the neighbours. In reaching its decision, the Court considered a range of important authorities spanning more than 250 years, including Penn v Lord Baltimore (1750), Neilson v Poole (1969), Gibson v New (2021), White v Alder (2025) and Bishop v Jacques (2025). Our Head of Legal Training Richard Snape looks at what these cases tell us about informal boundary agreements and certainty of ownership.This episode offers insight into an area of property law where a few inches of land can lead to years of litigation. Relevant Cases:White v Alder [2025]Bishop v Jacques [2025]Penn v Lord Baltimore (1750)Neilson v Poole [1969]Gibson v New [2021]Get in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

Moorings, the Thames and Adverse Possession.Can a boat help you acquire land? What rights come with a mooring on the River Thames? How does adverse possession affect riverside property owners?In this episode of When Land Meets the Sea, Richard Snape and Elizabeth Collin explore mooring rights and adverse possession along one of Britain's most famous waterways: the River Thames.Richard discusses how long-term occupation of land adjoining the river can give rise to adverse possession claims, and the legal issues that arise when moorings, boundaries and ownership rights become blurred over time.The episode explores the legal issues affecting landowners, developers, marina operators, local authorities and those living and working along the Thames.Cases discussed include:Port of London Authority v Ashmore [2009]Port of London Authority v Tower Bridge Yacht & Boat Co Ltd [2013]Couper and Another v Albion Properties Ltd and Others [2013]Port of London Authority v Paul Mendoza [2017]Get in touch!Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

In this episode of When Land Meets the Sea, Richard Snape and Elizabeth Collin continue to explore the law of the foreshore, the strip of land lying between high and low water marks that forms the ever-changing boundary between land and sea.Drawing on cases including Attorney-General v Chambers (1854), Blundell v Catterall (1821) and Bocardo SA v Star Energy Weald Basin Ltd (2010), Richard unpacks who owns the foreshore, the extent of public rights over beaches, and how the law balances private ownership with public access.The episode also examines the development of the England and Wales Coast Path, exploring how these coastal access routes have expanded opportunities for the public to enjoy the coastline while raising important questions about land ownership, and access rights.From Victorian disputes about bathing on the beach to modern debates about access, ownership and development, this episode reveals how centuries of property law continue to shape the way we use, enjoy and protect our coastline today.Whether you are a landowner, developer, surveyor, property lawyer, local authority officer or simply someone who enjoys a walk along the coast, this episode offers an introduction to the legal issues that lie between the land and the sea.Cases discussed include:Attorney-General v Chambers (1854)Bocardo SA v Star Energy Weald Basin Ltd (2010)Blundell v Catterall (1821)Malcomson v O'Dea (1863) Get in touch!Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

Who is liable when nature destroys your property?Imagine buying your dream coastal property, only to discover that the cliff beneath it is slowly disappearing.As Richard and Lizzie continue their journey around Britain's coastline, they tackle one of the most dramatic consequences of coastal erosion: what happens when the land beneath your property literally falls into the sea?From collapsing hotels to cliff-top homes and protected coastlines, this episode explores who bears the legal risk when nature takes its course.Drawing on cases including Holbeck Hall Hotel v Scarborough Borough Council, Taylor v Diamond and R (Boggis) v Natural England, Richard and Lizzie examine how the law balances private property rights with the natural movement of the coastline.As coastal erosion accelerates around the UK, these cases are becoming increasingly relevant for anyone involved in coastal development, planning or property ownership. They demonstrate that while the law cannot stop the sea, it plays a crucial role in determining where responsibility begins, and ends.‘When Land Meets the Sea’ is a podcast series exploring the legal, commercial and environmental issues shaping the future of Britain's coastal communities. Relevant Cases:Taylor v Diamond [2012]Holbeck Hall Hotel v Scarborough BC [2001]R (Boggis & Anor) v Natural England [2009]Get in touch!Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

Imagine waking up one morning to discover you've gained a few metres of beach... or lost half your garden to the sea. It sounds like bad luck, but English property law has had an answer for this since Roman times. In this episode we're looking at three wonderfully obscure words, accretion, diluvion and avulsion.On the next stop of their coastal road trip, Richard and Lizzie explore one of the oldest and most unusual areas of property law: the legal consequences of a changing coastline.The principles of accretion, diluvion and avulsion date back to Roman law, yet they continue to determine ownership of coastal land and riverbeds today. Despite their importance, remarkably little modern case law exists, leaving lawyers to rely on legal principles that are centuries old. In this episode of ‘When Land Meets the Sea’, Richard and Lizzie explain how the law deals with land that nature quietly gives... and quietly takes away. They discuss:• What accretion, diluvion and avulsion actually mean (without the Latin headache)• Why ownership boundaries can move naturally over time• The legal difference between gradual erosion and a sudden landslide• How these principles apply to both coastlines and riverbeds• The case of Gifford v Lord Yarborough (1828) and why it still matters today• Who owns newly formed land created by natural processes• What happens when coastal erosion causes land to disappear As rising sea levels, coastal erosion and changing river systems become increasingly significant, these legal principles remain relevant. Whether you're a coastal landowner, developer, surveyor or simply fascinated by the law of the shoreline, this episode uncovers how nature can quietly redraw legal boundaries without anyone signing a document.‘When Land Meets the Sea’ is a podcast series exploring the legal, commercial and environmental issues shaping the future of Britain's coastal communities.Relevant cases:Gifford v Lord Yarborough (1828)Ramsbury Properties Ltd v Oceanview Construction Ltd [2024]Attorney-General of Southern Nigeria v. John Holt & Co. (Liverpool) Ltd. [1915]Southern Centre of Theosophy Inc v State of South Australia [1982]Lynn Shellfish Ltd v Loose [2016]Get in touch!Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

From coastal paths to private estates, golf courses to historic garden developments, the West Country has quietly generated case law on easements and covenants.Drawing on cases including Re Ellenborough Park, Wilkinson v Kerdene, Jelbert v Davis, Churston Golf Club v Haddock and Stenner v Teignbridge District Council, Richard and Lizzie explore how legal rights over land can bind owners long after the original deal was struck.In this episode, Richard and Lizzie discuss:• What actually counts as an easement • How rights over parks, estates and shared spaces are created and enforced • The tension between private landownership and public or communal access • Why covenants can run with land and continue binding future owners • How disputes over footpaths, access routes and recreational land reach the courts • The role of golf clubs, coastal developments and local authorities in shaping modern case law • When historic rights become commercially significant property constraints • How courts balance fairness, practicality and long-established land use ‘When Land Meets the Sea’  is a podcast series exploring the legal, commercial and environmental issues shaping the future of Britain’s coastal communities. Relevant cases: Re Ellenborough Park [1955] Wilkinson v Kerdene [2013] Jelbert v Davis [1968] Churston Golf Club v Haddock [2019] Stenner v Teignbridge District Council [2025] Halsall v Brizell [1957]Austerberry v Corporation of Oldham (1885)Get in touch!Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

As their coastal road trip continues, Richard and Lizzie turn their attention to village greens.Despite the name, a village green does not need to be in a village, nor does it need to be green. Quarries, industrial land, playing fields and even beaches have all been the subject of village green claims. In this episode of ‘When Land Meets the Sea’, Richard explores the West Beach in Newhaven and the Supreme Court decision in R (Newhaven Port & Properties Ltd) v East Sussex County Council [2015].The case raised a fundamental question: can land used by local people for recreation become a village green, even when it forms part of a working commercial port? Richard and Lizzie discuss:• What qualifies as a town or village green under English law • Why a beach can potentially become a village green • The legal test of public use "as of right" • The difference between using land by permission and using it as a legal right • How local recreational use can create powerful rights over land • Why the Supreme Court ruled that Newhaven's West Beach could not be registered as a village green • The concept of "statutory incompatibility" and its impact on ports, infrastructure and public bodies • What the decision means for coastal landowners, harbour authorities, developers and local communities The Newhaven case highlights the often delicate balance between public access, community interests and the operational needs of critical coastal infrastructure.  Whether you are involved in coastal development, public sector property, ports, regeneration projects or simply enjoy exploring Britain's beaches, this episode offers a fascinating insight into the hidden legal rights that can exist beneath our feet. ‘When Land Meets the Sea’ is a podcast series exploring the legal, commercial and environmental issues shaping the future of Britain's coastal communities. Relevant cases: TW Logistics v Essex County Council [2018] Get in touch!Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

Who owns the land between high and low tide? Can the Crown claim ownership of coastal land through adverse possession? What rights do the public really have to use beaches?In this episode of the our miniseries ‘When Land Meets The Sea’, hosts Richard and Lizzie explore ownership of the foreshore and coastal land in England and Wales.Drawing on cases including Blundell v Catterall (1821), Mark Andrew Roberts v Crown Estate Commissioners (2008) and Mark Andrew Robert v Swangrove Estates Ltd & Ors (2007), Richard examine’s the centuries-old legal principles that continue to shape our coastline today.They discuss:• Why the public does not automatically have a legal right to use the foreshore • How the Crown Estate came to own most of the foreshore around England and Wales • Whether the Crown can acquire land through adverse possession (squatter's rights) • The legal battle over ownership of the Severn Estuary foreshore • The significance of dredging, licensing and coastal management activities in establishing ownership rights • The continuing impact of adverse possession principles following JA Pye (Oxford) Ltd v Graham When Land Meets The Sea is a podcast series exploring the legal, commercial and environmental issues shaping the future of Britain's coastal communities.Get in touch!Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

In this episode of Unpacking the Case, we examine the Upper Tribunal's decision in Notting Hill Home Ownership Ltd v Samoail and Others [2026] UKUT 235 (LC), a significant ruling for landlords, housing associations and shared ownership providers.The Tribunal confirmed that shared ownership leaseholders cannot be required to pay service charges for parts of an estate that fall outside the scope of their sub-lease and which they are unable to access. The decision dismissed appeals brought by Notting Hill Genesis and followed disputes involving substantial service charge demands, with some residents facing bills of more than £6,000 to contribute towards maintenance.We explore why the wording of leases remains crucial, and the wider implications for service charge recovery, estate management and shared ownership developments across England and Wales.Whether you advise landlords, manage residential developments or work in the affordable housing sector, this episode highlights an important reminder that service charge obligations must be rooted firmly in the rights and responsibilities set out in the lease.Relevant Cases:Chartbrook Ltd v Persimmon Homes Ltd [2009]Get in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

In this episode of Unpacking the Case, our head of legal training Richard Snape examines the decision in EE Limited and Hutchison 3G UK Limited v AP Wireless II (UK) Limited, regarding the Electronic Communications Code, the Digital Economy Act 2017 and the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954.At the heart of the dispute is the question: when telecoms operators occupy land under an agreement, are they tenants with leasehold rights, or merely licensees?Richard explores how the courts are approaching telecoms agreements following the reforms introduced by the Digital Economy Act.The discussion considers the consequences for landowners, telecoms operators, investors and property professionals involved in telecoms infrastructure and development sites.Relevant Cases:Pretoria Energy Company v Blankney Estates [2022]Newham LBC v Thomas-Van Staden [2008] Brilliant v Michaels [1945]Swift v MacBean [1942]Get in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

Following our recent webinar giving an update on the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 and the proposed ban on upwards-only rent reviews (UORR), property professionals sent in questions about what these changes could mean.In this special Q&A episode, our Head of Legal Training Richard Snape tackles audience questions covering lease renewals, security of tenure, break clauses, section 25 notices, rent review mechanisms, reversionary leases, index-linked reviews, turnover rents and the potential impact of the proposed UORR reforms.Richard also explores some of the hottest topics in the commercial property market right now, including when the ban may take effect, whether existing arrangements could be affected, how future lease drafting might change and what landlords and tenants should be thinking about as the legislation develops.Whether you're a landlord, tenant, property developer, investor, surveyor or real estate lawyer, this episode provides insights into one of the most significant proposed changes to commercial leasing in recent years.Topics covered include:Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 renewalsSecurity of tenureSection 25 noticesBreak clausesUpwards-only rent review reformRent review clausesCPI and RPI reviewsTurnover rentsReversionary leasesGet in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

Following one of our most popular property law webinars, we're back with a special Q&A episode tackling your adverse possession questions.Can mowing land for years prove possession? What's the difference between encroachment and adverse possession? Can someone really acquire land that doesn't belong to them?In this episode of Unpacking the Case, our Head of Legal Training, Richard Snape, answers real questions submitted by property professionals from across the sector. Covering everything from evidence and Land Registry applications to boundary disputes, highways, common land and landlord and tenant scenarios.Whether you're a surveyor, developer, asset manager, property lawyer or landowner, this episode will help you navigate one of the most misunderstood areas of property law. Topics covered include:Proving adverse possessionBoundary disputesRegistered and unregistered landLand Registry applicationsRights of way and public landLandlord and tenant issuesDefeating adverse possession claimsPractical evidence and strategy Relevant cases: Dobson v Unsted (2026)Hood v Southern Land Securities Ltd & Anor [2025]Relins v Gill [2025]Clapham v Narga [2024]Dwyer v The City of Westminster (2014)Benn v Harding (1993)George Wimpey & Co. Ltd. v. Sohn [1967]JA Pye (Oxford) Ltd v Graham [2003]Thorpe v Frank [2019]Kirkman v Bradshaw Pub Company Ltd [2025]Get in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

Can a commercial lease come to an end because an unexpected event has destroyed its purpose?In this episode of Unpacking the Case, Richard and Lizzie examine Into Nominee 1 Ltd v Study Group UK Ltd, a recent High Court decision that visits the contractual principle of frustration.The case is the latest in a long line of attempts by tenants to argue that a lease has been frustrated by events outside their control. This time, the dispute arose against the backdrop of post-Grenfell fire safety concerns, with the tenant arguing that the common purpose of the lease had been undermined. Richard explains why frustration rarely succeeds in the context of leases. Whether you're a commercial property lawyer, surveyor, landlord or tenant, this episode explores why frustration remains one of the hardest to establish arguments in real estate law. Relevant cases: Taylor v Caldwell (1863)Cricklewood Property and Investment Trust Ltd v Leighton's Investment Trust Ltd (1945)National Carriers Ltd v Panalpina (Northern) Ltd [1981]Canary Wharf v European Medicines Agency [2019]Bank of New York Mellon (International) Ltd v Cine-UK Ltd [2022]Krell v Henry [1903]Get in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

In this episode of Unpacking the Case, Richard and Lizzie discuss Essendi Hotels UK 2 Limited v London Property Group, a High Court decision examining responsibility for unsafe cladding in a commercial lease.The case concerns a budget hotel near Wembley that was forced to shut its doors after combustible cladding, similar to that involved in the Grenfell Tower tragedy, created serious fire safety concerns. With the Building Safety Act offering no protection because the property was a hotel rather than residential accommodation, the dispute turned on a fundamental question of landlord and tenant law: who was responsible for putting the problem right?Whether you advise on hotels, offices, retail or mixed-use developments, this episode highlights why careful drafting of repair and compliance provisions has never been more important.Relevant cases: Credit Suisse v Beegas Nominees Ltd [1994]Welsh v Greenwich London Borough Council (2000)Get in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

In this episode, Richard and Lizzie unpack the County Court’s decision in Star Pubs Trading Ltd v Gunmakers Arms (Essex) LLP and what it means for landlords, tenants, pub operators, and commercial property lawyers.The court ruled that Star Pubs could successfully oppose lease renewal under Ground G of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, despite day-to-day pub operations being carried out by a third-party contractor. Why? Star Pubs still controlled the pricing, branding, contracts, marketing, and overall retail strategy. The business, legally speaking, remained theirs.Richard explore’s what “occupation for your own business” really means in modern commercial leasing, why physical presence is not the deciding factor, and how this case fits alongside authorities including Humber Oil Terminals Trustee Ltd v Associated British Ports, S Frances Ltd v Cavendish Hotel (London) Ltd and Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea v Mellcraft.Relevant cases: Humber Oil Terminals Trustee Ltd v Associated British Ports [2012] Cunliffe v Goodman [1951] S Frances Ltd v Cavendish Hotel (London) Ltd [2012] Dellneed Ltd v Chin (1987)Brumwell v Powys County Council [2011]Teesside Indoor Bowls Limited v Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council [1990]Graysim Holdings v P&O Property Holdings [1996]Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea v Mellcraft [2024] Get in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

Does a telecoms operator need to physically occupy the demised premises for the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 to apply? According to the Upper Tribunal in EE v Clock Tower Investments Limited [2026] UKUT 163 (LC), the answer may be far more complicated than expected.In this episode, Richard and Lizzie unpack the surprising decision that a telecommunications lease could still benefit from the protection of the 1954 Act even where the operator did not physically occupy the demised ground itself, instead using adjacent roof space through installation and access rights.The case raises important questions around what “occupation for business purposes” really means. Richard discusses:•Why the Upper Tribunal decided the 1954 Act applied •The significance of business occupation under the Act •The difference between physical possession and operational control •The wider implications for landlords, operators and property lawyers.Relevant cases:Land Reclamation Co Ltd v Basildon District Council [1979]Pointon York Group Plc v Ann Doreen Poulton (2006)Re No 1 Albemarle Street [1959]Moody v Steggles (1879) Re Ellenborough Park [1955]Re Salvin’s Indenture [1938] Stenner v Teignbridge DC [2025]AP Wireless II (UK) Ltd v On Tower (UK) Limited [2025]Get in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

In this episode, Richard and Lizzie unpack the Court of Appeal’s remarkably fast-tracked judgment handed down on 13th May, following the original County Court decision on 20th March. The case raises a fascinating and largely untested argument under section 28 of the 1954 Act: can an option to renew amount to an agreement for lease, taking it outside the protection of the Act altogether?Richard discusses the background facts, why the appeal moved through the courts so rapidly, what the Court of Appeal decided, and what landlords, tenants and property lawyers should now be thinking about when drafting and exercising renewal options.For anyone dealing with commercial leases, security of tenure or renewal rights, this is a case worth watching closely.Get in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

The Renters’ Rights Act came into force on the 1st May 2026, but major questions remain for property professionals.In this Q&A special, hosts Richard and Lizzie answer the questions our audience are asking, including: whether fixed-term tenancies survive the transition, how the new possession grounds will work in practice, the impact on rent reviews and tribunal challenges, and whether the court system is realistically equipped to cope with the volume of disputes likely to follow.Richard also explores the grey areas already causing concern across the sector, including pets in leasehold flats, mixed-use buildings, Airbnb arrangements, student accommodation exemptions, and whether landlords may respond by increasing asking rents.Alongside legal analysis, the discussion considers the wider market sentiment emerging since the Act came into force, including concerns over supply, investor confidence, and the long-term consequences for the private rented sector.This episode is essential listening for landlords, investors, managing agents, developers, surveyors, and property lawyers navigating one of the most significant reforms to land law in decades.Get in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

The English Devolution and Community Empowerment Act has now received Royal Assent, bringing the proposed ban on upwards-only rent reviews one step closer to reality. Although the changes are not expected to come into force until 2027, the legislation is already creating uncertainty across the commercial property market.In this episode, Richard and Lizzie break down what the Act actually says, the key amendments introduced during its rapid passage through Parliament, and the major questions that still remain unanswered. Richard also explores the implications for landlords, tenants, investors and lawyers, including the retrospective impact on certain renewal options and what this could mean for lease negotiations going forward.A must-listen for commercial property professionals trying to understand one of the most significant proposed shifts in leasing practice for decades.Get in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

Can a restrictive covenant really stop development forever? In this episode, Richard and Lizzie unpack the Upper Tribunal decision in Duncan Grossart v Vikki Ames [2026] UKUT 139 (LC), a fascinating case involving a Surrey farm, a barn development, and an attempt to remove a restrictive covenant under section 84 of the Law of Property Act 1925.The land had previously been refused planning permission for a substantial residential scheme, but changing circumstances in the surrounding area, including a nearby 132-home development, dramatically shifted the legal landscape. The Tribunal ultimately concluded that the covenant had become obsolete and no longer provided any practical benefit of substantial value to the neighbouring Grade II listed property.Richard explores what this means for developers, landowners, investors and property owners, including:•when restrictive covenants can be discharged or modified; •how tribunals assess whether a covenant is “obsolete”; •the interaction between planning change and private land rights; •the importance of demonstrating practical benefit; and •why neighbouring owners cannot always rely on historic restrictions to block development. If you deal with strategic land, regeneration, development risk or contentious property issues, this is a case worth understanding.Relevant cases: Sutton v Baines [2022] UKUT 342 (LC)Fosse Urban Projects Ltd v Whyte & Ors [2023]UKUT 286 (LC) Get in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

In this episode, Richard and Lizzie unpack the High Court decision in Pridewell Properties (London) Ltd v Spirit Pub Co (Managed) London Ltd [2026] EWHC 953 (Ch), a case we are revisiting on redevelopment opposition under Ground (f) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954.The dispute regards The Railway Bell, a 19th century pub in South Woodford, where the landlord sought possession to redevelop the site by building houses in the beer garden and converting upper floors into residential flats.Although the court accepted the landlord genuinely intended to redevelop, the claim ultimately failed because the evidence on funding was not strong enough.Richard explores:• Why Ground (f) remains the most heavily litigated ground under the 1954 Act;• What counts as a “firm and settled intention” to redevelop;• Why proving funding is critical;• The evidential hurdles landlords face when opposing lease renewals; and• What this means for developers, investors, landlords and occupiers across the real estate market.A must-listen for anyone involved in commercial property redevelopment, asset management or lease renewals.Relevant cases: Bath Rugby Ltd v Greenwood & Ors v Bath Recreation Ltd [2021] [Hutchinson, Re 1 Captains (Lands Chamber) [2009]MVL Properties Ltd v The Leadmill Ltd [2025]Ministry of Sound Ltd v The British and Foreign Wharf Company Ltd [2025] Get in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

What happens when you put thousands of commercial property professionals in one (virtual) room and ask them what’s really keeping them up at night? In this episode, head of legal training Richard and host Lizzie answer the most pressing questions from our latest commercial property webinar which had over 4,000 registrants. From the proposed ban on upwards-only rent reviews to the evolution of security of tenure under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, Richard discuses where the market is heading. Richard and Lizzie discuss:  •Rent review clauses  •How landlords are using (and testing) redevelopment breaks  •The risks around leases, licences and tenancies at will  •The cases everyone is talking about, including AP Wireless II v On Tower UK Ltd and Lamba v Enfield LBC  •Service of notices If you’re involved in commercial property, whether advising, negotiating or making strategic decisions, this episode will give you a sharper sense of what’s coming next. Relevant cases: •AP Wireless II v On Tower UK Ltd [2025] •Lamba v Enfield LBC (2025) •Park Cakes V Caterpillar Property Limited (2026) •White v Alder [2025] •Davies v Bridgend County Borough Council [2024] •Spirit Pub Company  (Managed) London V Pridewell Property Limited [2025] •Blunden v Frogmore Investments Ltd [2002] Get in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

When does a landlord’s “no” stop being reasonable, and start blocking regeneration? In this episode, hosts Richard and Lizzie unpack the High Court decision in Great Jackson St Estates Ltd v Manchester City Council, a dispute at the heart of a major Manchester regeneration scheme. At the centre of the case was a landlord refusing consent for demolition works under an existing lease. The court found that refusal unlawful, clearing the path for redevelopment to proceed. Crucially, the judgment draws a line between alteration and demolition.  Richard also explores what it means for developers, landlords, and local authorities navigating restrictive covenants and consent to alteration and demolition. If you’re involved in urban regeneration, leaseholds or public sector estates, this case is a reminder to exercise caution when refusing consent to alterations, particularly in complex urban regeneration projects.  Relevant cases: Great Jackson St Estates Ltd v The Council of the City of Manchester [2025]   Get in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

In this episode, hosts Richard and Lizzie answer some of our audiences’ questions from our webinar on Restrictive Covenants, Positive Covenants and Commonhold. Richard covers restrictive and positive covenants enforcement, disputes, and the future of commonhold.Drawing on scenarios faced by developers, surveyors, and other property professionals, we explore what actually happens when covenants are breached, how enforceability works in practice, and where the law still leaves uncertainty.We also look ahead to commonhold reform and what it could mean for ownership structures, service charges, and long-term development strategy.A must-listen for anyone working in commercial property, planning, or real estate development.Relevant cases:Tulk v Moxhay (1848) Austerberry v Corporation of Oldham (1885) Kelly v Barrett [1924]Wall v Collins [2007]Crest Nicholson Regeneration Ltd v Calvert [2026] Cosmichome Ltd v Southampton City Council [2013]Gafford v Graham and another [1999]Birdlip v Hunter [2016]Get in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

In this episode, hosts Richard and Lizzie take a closer look at Park Cakes V Caterpillar Property Limited (M80LS041 20 March 2026), a decision from the Leeds Business and Property Court involving Park Cakes, the manufacturer behind M&S’s iconic Colin the Caterpillar. This is not just a story about cakes. It’s an exploration of how options in leases operate, including what happens when those options are exercised and whether any resulting lease falls within the protection of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954. Richard explains that a renewal option gives the tenant an extra choice, not an automatic outcome and the real value lies in deciding which route to use, and when.When it comes to lease options, you can’t always have your cake and eat it.Get in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

How long is too long?In this episode, hosts Richard and Lizzie unpack the High Court decision in Crest Nicholson Regeneration Ltd v Calvert [2026] EWHC 531 (Ch) and what it tells us about the enduring, and often misunderstood, rule against perpetuities.The rule against perpetuities is designed to stop property from being tied up indefinitely. Traditionally, any future interest had to “vest” within a fixed period — often described as a life in being plus 21 years. If there was even a possibility that it wouldn’t, the arrangement could fail altogether.That creates real tension in modern option agreements, a staple of long-term development deals, where buyers secure the right to purchase land years (sometimes decades) into the future, often conditional on planning.Richard explores:how the rule against perpetuities developed, from The Duke of Norfolk's Case (1682) through to modern application; why option agreements have historically sat uncomfortably within that framework; and how the Perpetuities and Accumulations Act 2009 has reshaped the landscape by effectively removing the rule for options over land.For developers, landowners and advisers, the message is simple: timing, drafting and structure matter, because even historic rules can still have modern consequences.Other cases mentioned:The Duke of Norfolk's Case (1682)Street v Mountford [1985] AC 809Get in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

In this Newsflash episode, Lizzie and Richard explore Dobson & Anor v Unsted & Anor [2026] a case from the Upper Tribunal that has been making headlines. At the centre of the dispute is eight feet of lawn and a garden gnome that helped spark a neighbourly conflict.The case turns on the doctrine of adverse possession, which allows someone to claim ownership of land if they have possessed and treated it as their own for a set period of time.Richard analyses how much use is enough, does mowing and maintaining a strip of grass amount to possession and what is the significance of planting clover?Join us as we unpack the facts, the law, and what this surprisingly dramatic dispute over a small patch of grass tells us about adverse possession, particularly when it comes to unregistered land.Other cases mentioned:Clapham v Narga [2024]Thorpe v Frank & Anor [2019] Kirkman v Bradshaw Pub Company [2025]Get in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

The Government launched its latest leasehold reform via social media, but behind the headlines, the draft Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Bill could cause serious ripples across the property market.In this episode, we explore what happens when ground rent income disappears, why commonhold has struggled for 20 years, and whether calling it something other than “common” might have helped. More importantly, we ask: can commonhold function at scale in complex urban developments?Richard and Lizzie explore:• Why leasehold became the dominant structure for flats and the historic legal problem behind it.• Why commonhold failed to gain traction after its introduction in 2004 by the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002..• What the Draft Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Bill would change in practice, including restrictions on creating new long leasehold flats.• The practical governance and liability risks for commonhold associations, particularly in higher-risk buildings.• Whether commonhold can realistically function at scale in complex urban and mixed-use developments.• What developers, investors and affordable housing providers should be considering now.If you work in development, investment, or affordable housing, commonhold is not something you can afford to ignore.Other cases mentioned: Unpacking the Enforceability of Restrictive CovenantsAusterberry v Corporation of Oldham (1885)Spencer's Case [1583]Get in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

In this Newsflash episode, Lizzie Collin is joined by Richard Snape to unpack the High Court’s ex tempore decision in Lamba v Enfield Borough Council, a judgment that has already sparked lively debate across LinkedIn.The case raises fundamental questions about how notices are validly served under leases. Richard and Lizzie discuss:•How the court approached the interaction between section 196 of the Law of Property Act 1925 and section 23 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1927 when serving notices.•Why the decision appears to depart from established authority on when service is deemed effective•The significance of lease drafting, particularly where notice provisions state that notices “shall” be served in accordance with section 196.•The potential implications for statutory notices under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 and the Landlord and Tenant (Covenants) Act 1995.•Steps landlords, tenants, and practitioners should take to minimise risk when serving notices while uncertainty remains.This podcast highlights how a single drafting choice can fundamentally alter long-understood principles. For anyone advising on commercial property, lease renewals or break notices, this is a timely deep dive into a developing and potentially contentious area of law.Other cases mentioned include:•Commercial Union v Mustafa [1999]•Blunden v Frogmore Investments Ltd [2002]•CA Webber (Transport) Ltd v Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd (formerly Railtract Plc) [2003]•Beanby Estates Ltd v The Egg Stores (Stamford Hill) Ltd [2003]•Galinski v McHugh [1989]Get in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

Where exactly is the boundary, and what happens when the title plan doesn’t give a clear answer?In this Newsflash episode, Lizzie Collin is joined by Richard Snape to dissect the High Court’s decision in Handy Cross Dev Co Ltd v Vanni Properties Ltd [2026] a development-site boundary dispute based on an imprecise title plan.After an influx of boundary cases in the last year this wasn’t just a technical disagreement but went to the heart of how courts determine general boundaries, and when extrinsic evidence can genuinely assist to interpret ambiguity, not cure poor drafting.Under the general boundaries rule (s.60 Land Registration Act 2002), title plans show general, not exact, boundaries. If the wording of the transfer and the attached plan leave genuine uncertainty as to where the boundary lies, the court may look beyond the four corners of the document following Alan Wibberley Building Ltd v Insley. Richard and Lizzie explore:•How the court approaches “general boundaries” where transfer plans lack precision.•The strict threshold for admitting extrinsic evidence and why it must be genuinely probative.•Why post-dating conduct only carries weight if it is bilateral.•The dangers of assuming planning permissions and approved drawings can later fix unclear title boundaries.•What this means in practice for developers and local authorities The High Court confirmed the County Court and held one party’s unilateral assumption about the boundary is irrelevant. The court’s role is to interpret the legal document, not to achieve what seems commercially sensible years later.If you deal with development land, this is one to listen to before your next transaction. Other cases mentioned include:Alan Wibberley Building Ltd v Insley [1999Acco Properties Ltd v Severn [2011]Maximus Networks Ltd v Secretary of State for Transport [2018]Get in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

Following our hugely popular webinar, Responding to CPSE Enquiries – the Pitfalls, which attracted 3,500 registrants, Richard Snape, Head of Legal Training, joins host Lizzie Collin to answer the questions our audience most wanted addressed.Commercial Property Standard Enquiries (CPSEs) are standard pre-contract forms prepared by the British Property Federation and used in UK commercial property transactions, requiring sellers or landlords to disclose key information about title, the property’s condition and liabilities to ensure transparency before exchange.This Q&A-style episode tackles the practical and often contentious issues that arise when responding to CPSEs, including the risks of using “not aware” responses, whether sellers must highlight title defects in auction packs, and how far a seller’s duty of enquiry extends. The discussion also explores fire risk assessments, asbestos obligations, vacant properties, and the interaction between CPSE replies and potential misrepresentation liability.The episode further examines recent Building Safety Act requirements, including higher-risk buildings, safety case reports, leaseholder deeds of certificate, and common misconceptions around listed buildings and EPC exemptions. Throughout, the focus remains firmly on risk management as a failure to respond correctly to CPSE Enquiries may result in a negligence claim.Relevant cases: First Tower Trustees v CDS (Superstores International) Limited [2018]Sykes v Taylor-Rose [2004]Get in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

Following our most popular webinar to date, with 3,900 registrants,  Richard Snape, Head of Legal Training, joins host Lizzie Collin to answer the questions our audience most wanted addressed on the Landlord & Tenant Act 1954.This Q&A-style episode dives into some of the trickiest and most topical areas of lease renewals, including grounds F and G, statutory compensation, and how evolving issues such as green lease clauses are beginning to affect renewal strategy. They also discuss the latest on the proposed ban on upwards rent reviews. Drawing on case law, the discussion cuts through the theory to focus on what landlords and tenants need to be thinking about now when navigating renewals under the Act — particularly in light of ongoing legislative change.Relevant cases: •Kensington and Chelsea London Borough Council v Mellcroft Ltd [2024] •Ambrose v Kaye [2002]•Cunliffe v Goodman [1950] •Gregson v Cyril Lord Carpets Ltd [1963] •Gatwick Parking Service v Sargent [2000] •Coppin v Bruce-Smith [1998]•Betty’s Café Ltd v Phillips Furnishing Stores Ltd [1959] •Vodafone Limited v Gravesham Borough Council [2025]•The Gulf Agencies Ltd v Ahmed [2016]•MVL Properties (2017) Ltd v The Leadmill Ltd (2025)•Bath v Prichard [1990]•WH Smith v Commerz Real Investmentgesellschaft [2021]•Clipper Logistics plc v Scottish Equitable plc [2022]•O’May v City of London Real Property Co [1983]Get in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

In this Newsflash episode, Lizzie Collin is joined by Richard Snape, Head of Legal Training at Davitt Jones Bould, to unpack a Court of Appeal decision about an ecclesiastical setting.Cloisters Business Centre Management Company Limited v Anvari [2026] is about service charge liability in a former convent converted into mixed business and residential use and raises important questions about when statutory protections under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 are triggered.Richard and Lizzie explore how the Court of Appeal approached the definition of a “dwelling”, and why ancillary or intended residential use can be enough to bring statutory service charge controls into play, even where premises are predominantly commercial.The discussion covers:•The background to the dispute and the unusual mixed-use setup at Priory House•How the Court of Appeal interpreted “dwelling” under the 1985 Act•Why residential use doesn’t need to be obvious or dominant to matter•The consequences for landlords, tenants and advisers dealing with mixed-use buildings, and service charge consultation requirements. This case is a reminder that service charge recovery in mixed-use properties remains a sensitive area, and that assumptions about “commercial” buildings can quickly unravel upon closer inspection.Other cases mentioned:- JLK Ltd v Sleepy Hollow Ltd- Kensington and Chelsea v MellcraftGet in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

In this Newsflash episode, Lizzie Collin sits down with Richard Snape, Head of Legal Training at Davitt Jones Bould to discuss a recent Court of Appeal decision concerning London Borough of Tower Hamlets v Various Leaseholders. The case arose from an attempt by London Borough of Tower Hamlets to recover the cost of major structural works through service charges. The Court of Appeal rejected the council’s arguments, holding that the leases did not permit those costs to be passed on, reinforcing important protections for leaseholders, particularly under right-to-buy leases.Richard explains the complex background behind the dispute, involving why The First-tier Tribunal (FTT) and Upper Tribunal found the leases did not allow these charges., and why the Court of Appeal dismissed the Council's appeal.  Richard and Lizzie explore:• Why landlords cannot assume historic or structural defects can be recovered via service charges • The broader context of ongoing debate aiming to make leasehold fairer • The contractual terms of the leases • How sections 11–16 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 shaped the court’s approach  • Lessons for landlords and tenants.Other cases mentioned: London Borough of Tower Hamlets v Various Leaseholders [2025]Quick v Taff Ely Borough Council [1985]  Get in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

In this Newsflash episode, Lizzie Collin sits down with Richard Snape, Head of Legal Training at Davitt Jones Bould to discuss a recent County Court decision handed down in November concerning Azam v Violet Developments LLP & Ors.Richard explains the complex background behind the dispute, involving the delayed completion of a major residential and commercial redevelopment in East London, the financial difficulties faced by the developer, and the subsequent forfeiture proceedings brought by the landlord, Mr Azam.Richard and Lizzie explore:•How the court approached relief from forfeiture under Section 146 of the Law of Property Act 1925 and the wide discretion available to judges.•Why delays in practical completion had significant financial consequences, particularly due to the introduction of the Leasehold Reform (Ground Rent) Act 2022.•The key issue of whether compensation could extend to losses not expressly mentioned in the s146 notice.•How earlier authorities such as Hyman v Rose, Southern Depot v British Railways Board, and others shaped the court’s conclusion.•Lessons for landlords, tenants, developers and lenders in managing development obligations, delayed projects, and forfeiture risk.The judgment, resulting in an award of approximately £1.4 million in compensation, illustrates the scope of the court’s discretion and highlights the importance of drafting, timing and strategic decision-making in property development arrangements.Other cases mentioned: - Hyman v Rose [1912]- Southern Depot v British Railways Board [1990]Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content.Get in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

In this Newsflash episode, Lizzie Collin sits down with Richard Snape, Head of Legal Training at Davitt Jones Bould, to discuss the recent County Court decision in Ministry of Sound v British and Foreign Wharf Ltd, a case centred on lease renewals under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954. The dispute concerned the site of the Ministry of Sound nightclub, and explores the legal tests governing redevelopment break clauses, the balance between tenant security and landlord development rights, and how the law evaluates planning prospects over long lease terms.Richard and Lizzie discuss: • The background to the Ministry of Sound’s 15-year lease renewal request and the landlord’s desire for a redevelopment break. • The two-stage test for redevelopment break clauses, including subjective intention and objective “real prospect” of obtaining planning permission. • How expert evidence shaped the court’s view on the likelihood of residential redevelopment. • The longstanding principle that the 1954 Act should not stifle development, traced through key authorities. • How a break notice can be framed as a section 25 notice, enabling landlords to rely on Ground F when terminating a protected tenancy.This case illustrates the continuing judicial effort to balance commercial certainty for tenants with development flexibility for landlords, providing important guidance for property owners, occupiers, and advisors involved in 1954 Act negotiations and contested lease renewals.Other cases mentioned:• Cunliffe v Goodman [1950] • Hawthorn v Barry UDC (1956) • National Car Parks Ltd v The Paternoster Consortium Ltd [1990] • B&M Retail Ltd v HSBC Bank Pension Trust (UK) Ltd [2023]  • Shoal Manufacturing v Clifton Slimline (1967)Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content.Get in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

In this Newsflash episode, Lizzie Collin sits down with Richard Snape, Head of Legal Training at Davitt Jones Bould, to discuss the Upper Tribunal decision in Kingdom Hall Trust v Peter Robert Davies. They unpack the complexities of prescriptive easements, focusing on the requirement for a capable grantor and how charitable land status impacts the ability to claim easements.Richard and Lizzie discuss:• The background and legal fiction behind prescriptive easements and “lost modern grant”.• How the Tribunal approached the concept of a capable grantor in the context of charitable land.• The implications of the decision for landowners, developers, and practitioners dealing with historic land use and rights of way.This case highlights the evolving interpretation of prescription law and offers key insights into managing rights over land with charitable or ecclesiastical ownership.Other cases mentioned: Hughes v Incumbent of the Benefice of Frampton-on-Severn and OthersTraining & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content.Get in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

In this Newsflash episode, Lizzie Collin sits down with Richard Snape, Head of Legal Training at Davitt Jones Bould to discuss the Upper Tribunal decision in Almacantar Centre Point Nominee No.1 Ltd & Anor v Penelope de Valk & Ors. They explore leaseholder protections under Part 5 of the Building Safety Act, including what constitutes a “relevant defect,” how cladding remediation is treated, and the implications for qualifying and non-qualifying leaseholders.Richard and Lizzie discuss: • How the Tribunal considered what constitutes a “relevant defect” under Part 5 of the Building Safety Act. • The significance of qualifying versus non-qualifying leaseholders in determining liability for service charges. • How the ruling clarifies the treatment of cladding remediation and structural safety risks. • Key takeaways for landlords, leaseholders, and practitioners managing building safety compliance and historic defects.The case highlights ongoing uncertainty in building safety law and demonstrates the importance of careful drafting, strategic advice, and understanding leaseholder protections when negotiating property rights. This episode explores the court’s approach to historic defects and cladding issues, offering insight relevant to those involved in service charge management.Other Cases Mentioned: Almacantar Centre Point Nominee No.1 Ltd & Anor v Penelope de Valk & Ors [2025]Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals: Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content.Get in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

In this Newsflash episode, Lizzie Collin is joined by Richard Snape, Head of Legal Training at Davitt Jones Bould, to analyse the recent First-tier Tribunal decision in On Tower v AP Wireless II.This important case raises significant questions for both landlords and tenants in relation to periodic tenancies and tenancies at will, as well as their interaction with the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 and the Electronic Communications Code.Richard and Lizzie discuss:How the Tribunal approached the distinction between a periodic tenancy and a tenancy at will.Why this distinction matters when determining security of tenure under the 1954 Act.The wider implications for operators and landowners in the telecoms sector, particularly where the Electronic Communications Code applies.Practical takeaways for landlords, tenants, and practitioners dealing with lease renewals and electronic communications agreements.The case highlights ongoing uncertainty in this area of law and demonstrates the need for careful drafting and strategic advice when negotiating property rights. For those advising on commercial property or telecoms infrastructure, this episode provides valuable insight into how the courts are likely to treat such disputes going forward.Other Cases Mentioned: AP Wireless II v On Tower [2025]Mannai Investment Co. Ltd v. Eagle Star Assurance [1997]Smoke Club Ltd and others v Network Rail Infrastructure Limited [2021]Valleyview v NHS Property Services [2022] Wheeler v Mercer [1956]Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals: Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content.Get in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

In this episode, Richard Snape, Head of Legal Training, joins host Lizzie Collin to answer some of the audience questions from our latest webinar discussing Commercial Leases Update – Including the Ban on Upwards-Only Rent Reviews. They cover key issues such as stepped rents, index-linked reviews, contracting out, and the potential impact of these reforms on lease negotiations.Other Legislation Mentioned:English Devolution and Community Empowerment BillAP Wireless II v On Tower [2025] Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals: Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking. This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

In this episode, Richard Snape, Head of Legal Training, joins host Lizzie Collin to answer some of the audience questions from our latest webinar discussing the Landlord & Tenant Act 1954. They explore complex issues including pre-1954 Act ground leases, the risks of using tenancies at will, contracting out procedures, and how recent case law is shaping the interpretation of security of tenure.Other cases mentioned:Street v Mountford [1985] : https://www.djblaw.co.uk/post/building-blocks-street-v-mountford-1985Wheeler v. Mercer (1956)Jones v. Bridgman (1878)Javad v Aqil [1991]AP Wireless II (UK) Ltd v On Tower (UK) Ltd [2025]: https://www.djblaw.co.uk/post/newsflash-ap-wireless-ii-v-on-towerNewham Borough Council v Thomas Van Staden [2008]Mexfield Housing Cooperative Ltd v Berrisford [2012]Walsh v Lonsdale [1882]: https://www.djblaw.co.uk/post/building-blocks-walsh-v-lonsdale-1882Valley View Health Centre v. NHS Property Services (2020)Erimus Housing Limited v Barclays Wealth Trustees (Jersey) Limited  [2014]Clear Channel UK Ltd v Manchester City Council (2005) Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals: Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking. This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content.' Get in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

In this Newsflash episode, Lizzie Collin sits down with Richard Snape, Head of Legal Training at Davitt Jones Bould, to discuss the Court of Appeal’s recent decision in AP Wireless II v On Tower.  They explore how the Court of Appeal revisited the lease versus licence distinction, why contractual labels alone are not decisive, and how this judgment reshapes the risk landscape for landowners, operators and advisers working with electronic communications agreements. Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals: Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking. This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content.Get in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

In this Newsflash episode, Lizzie Collin sits down with Richard Snape, Head of Legal Training at Davitt Jones Bould, to discuss a move few in the property market anticipated, the government’s surprise proposal to ban upwards-only rent reviews.  The proposal, unexpectedly included in the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, has sent ripples through the commercial property sector. Richard and Lizzie unpack what the legislation is seeking to achieve, why it has appeared now, and how it could fundamentally alter the risk profile of commercial leases. This episode explains what could change, what might not, and where the real uncertainty lies. Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals: Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking. This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content.Get in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

 In this Newsflash episode, Lizzie Collin sits down with Richard Snape, Head of Legal Training at Davitt Jones Bould, to discuss the latest Court of Appeal judgment on leaseholder protections under the Building Safety Act. Using Adriatic Land v Leaseholders at Hippersley Point as a case study, they unpack legal costs, retrospective service charges, and what this means for qualifying leaseholders moving forward. Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content.Get in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

In this Newsflash episode, Lizzie Collin is joined by Richard Snape, Head of Legal Training at Davitt Jones Bould, to break down a significant Upper Tribunal decision in Stenner v Teignbridge District Council.They explore how prescriptive easements are established, the critical distinction between easements and exclusive possession, and why long-term use does not always result in legal rights. Using examples such as car parking and boat storage, the discussion highlights the risks for landowners, developers, local authorities and occupiers.Get in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

In this Newsflash episode, Lizzie Collin is joined by Richard Snape, Head of Legal Training at Davitt Jones Bould, to analyse the High Court’s decision in Cotham School v Bristol City Council.The discussion explores the legal framework behind village green applications, including the rarely used section 14B of the Commons Registration Act 1965, and why this case marks an important development for landowners and public bodies. Lizzie and Richard examine how statutory incompatibility, safeguarding obligations and on-site signage were central to the court’s reasoning.This episode provides insight into when land cannot lawfully be registered as a town or village green, what this decision means for schools, local authorities and developers, and how professionals can manage village greens.Get in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!

In this Newsflash episode, Lizzie Collin is joined by Richard Snape, Head of Legal Training at Davitt Jones Bould, to analyse the High Court’s decision in Atkinson and Others v Browne.The discussion unpacks key legal principles relating to boundary presumptions, the enforceability of restrictive covenants, and whether trustees can acquire land through adverse possession within a private estate. Lizzie and Richard explore how long-standing assumptions about boundaries can be challenged.This episode provides insight for landowners, trustees, developers and property professionals dealing with boundary disputes, estate management and adverse possession claims.Get in touch! Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.  This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content. Get in touch!