Sun08202017

Last updateTue, 24 Feb 2015 5pm

Property Law Journal: 1 July 2013

Juliet Brook examines whether title or rectification takes priority, with reference to Parshall v Hackney

Of the various principles enshrined within English land law, the state guarantee afforded to registered titles and the doctrine of relativity of titles are the two that are most obviously on a collision course: see JA Pye (Oxford) Ltd v Graham [2003] and the subsequent JA Pye (Oxford) Ltd v United Kingdom [2007] if in any doubt!

Nabarro LLP

Lisa-Marie Davison and Sarah Frost advise on the common structures for mixed-use buildings with long residential leases

Mixed-use buildings are increasingly common in the commercial investment market. The potential complications associated with the residential element of such buildings mean that investors in mixed-use properties need to consider the structure and implications of any residential element before they invest.

Business rates mitigation schemes are under increasing scrutiny from the courts. Martin Dawbney and Frances Edwards explain

Business rates continue to make headlines with stories such as ‘Business rates have turned high streets into cash cows for Government’ (Retail Week, 21 May 2013), epitomising the antagonism of many businesses, particularly retailers on struggling high streets, to a taxation system that many consider to be flawed. The government’s unpopular decision to delay the next revaluation of properties for an additional two years until 2017, maintaining valuations that were last undertaken in 2008 at the height of the property market, has also created outrage within the property industry and among many retailers.

Forsters LLP

Guy Abrahams assesses Buzzoni v HMRC, which indicates the court’s current attitude towards reversionary lease schemes

The case of Buzzoni v HMRC [2012] concerned a scheme designed to reduce inheritance tax by taking advantage of the principle identified by the House of Lords in the Ingram case (Ingram v Commissioners of Inland Revenue [2000]).

John Starr

John Starr looks at recent case law on calculating limitation periods in construction claims

Once a limitation period expires, it is no longer possible to bring claims for loss or damage caused by the actions of others. There are good public policy reasons why these periods exist: memories fade over time and it is simply not fair for a potential defendant to have a claim hanging over its head forever.

Laurence Target considers the devices used to ensure that a seller benefits from any future increases in the value of its land

A seller of land may want to get a part of some future enhanced value after he has sold the land, and there may be good reasons for this. The possibility of future development at the time of sale may be obscure, not something that can have a sensible price put on it at the time of the sale. A buyer may well agree, and depending on how things turn out, he may get such an increase in value that he will be happy to share some of it with the seller. Even where increased land value seems to be a remote possibility, circumstances can change, unexpected planning permission may be forthcoming, and land values can be transformed.