Ten Startling Cases in Residential Property Law

Online content includes 120 days access from the date of purchase.
All purchases are for a single user only.

Sometimes the courts and tribunals can reach decisions that seem bizarre and counter-intuitive. This session will look at some of the more startling cases that have an impact on a wide range of residential property areas and considers ways to avoid the problems that arise.

• The one-sided approach of the Party Wall Act: Power v Shah
• Adverse possession of house by fraudster: Rashid v Nasrullah
• Contract by email: Neocleous v Ree;
• Sale must go ahead where mortgage offer expires due to developer’s delay: Urban v Ayres
• Imperfect notice to complete still works: TBAC v Valmar
• Flats:
  • When ownership can curtail the owner’s freedom: Nemcova v Fairfield
  • Losing the lease by forfeiture can easily happen: Gibbs v Lakeside
• Rights of way and residential land
  • Hidden rights of way and unforeseen expansion: Wood v Waddington; O’Byrne
  • When even renovation can be prevented: McGill v Stewart

Sarah Thompson-Copsey, Non-Practising Solicitor, Legal Lecturer and Trainer