Fri08182017

Last updateTue, 24 Feb 2015 5pm

Property Law Journal: October 2013
Nabarro LLP

Christopher Stanwell and Tim Stansfeld provide an overview of the current position and the proposed reforms, with a more detailed look at some of the significant proposals

On 6 September the Ministry of Justice announced a new consultation on further proposed reforms to the judicial review process. The consultation runs until 1 November 2013.

Does a ‘landlord’ include a ‘future landlord’ under the consultation requirements in s20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985? Sue Thompson considers a recent case bringing welcome clarity

In a groundbreaking decision the High Court has confirmed that the service charge consultation requirements under s20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 do not apply to long term agreements if they are entered into before a building is constructed or let.

The government is proposing to incorporate into the planning system a new biodiversity offsetting mechanism targeted at developers in England. Nigel Howorth , Elizabeth Hardacre and Michael Coxall answer ten key questions about the proposed mechanism

The new biodiversity mechanism is currently at the early stages of design, and developers should consider responding to Defra’s consultation paper to ensure the system is workable and does not unnecessarily add cost and bureaucracy to the development process.

Paul Tonkin and Eleanor Marsh summarise recent case law

John Starr

John Starr reviews a case in which set off against an adjudicator’s decision was sought but ultimately not granted

The question often arises in construction adjudication whether the losing party can set off against the adjudicator’s decision sums of money that it feels it is owed by the winning party. This is particularly the case where the construction project is ongoing and different amounts are becoming due from time to time, as certified by the contract administrator in interim certificates.

Tughans

Is Bocardo a new weapon in the armoury of fracking objectors? Andrew Ryan investigates

Back in 2010, the UK oil and gas extraction companies collectively held their breath as the Supreme Court considered an appeal on compensation rights and trespass arising from inshore oil wells. At stake was the prospect of such companies having to pay a significant cut of their profits to landowners through which their oil or gas extraction pipelines passed. To their relief, the Supreme Court ruled that the level of compensation should be pegged to the loss that the landowner suffered and not the profit the exploration company made.