Possession cases which had been stayed since the 26th March 2020 due to COVID-19 recommenced on the 21st September 2020 in the county court.
A list of priority cases has been formulated:-
i) Cases with allegations of anti-social behaviour, including Ground 7A of Schedule 2 to the Housing Act 1988 and Section 84A of the Housing Act 1985.
ii) Cases with extreme alleged rent arrears accrued, that is, arrears equal to at least
(i) 12 months’ rent, or
(ii) 9 months’ rent where that amounts to more than 25% of a private landlord’s total annual income from any source.
iii) Cases involving alleged squatters, illegal occupiers or persons unknown.
iv) Cases involving an allegation of domestic violence where possession of the property is alleged to be important for particular reasons which are set out in the claim form (and with domestic violence agencies alerted).
v) Cases with allegations of fraud or deception.
vi) Cases with allegations of unlawful subletting.
vii) Cases with allegations of abandonment of the property, non-occupation or death of defendant.
viii) Cases concerning what was allocated by an authority as ‘temporary accommodation’ and is specifically needed by the authority for reallocation as ‘temporary accommodation’.
On the 31st July 2020 the Prime Minister’s Office announced that Her Majesty The Queen had been pleased to approve the appointment of Sir Geoffrey Vos as the Master of the Rolls from the 11th January 2021 in succession to Sir Terence Etherton.
It is interesting to note that 6 out of 7 of the most recent incumbents of this judicial office have been of the jewish faith the others being Lords Woolf, Phillips, Neuberger and Dyson.
We find that jewish solicitors are often particularly sought after because of their perceived quality traits of intelligence, shrewdness, toughness and integrity.
If you are looking to find such a solicitor please do not hesitate to call us.Share This:-
House prices are beginning to rise as we ease out of lockdown commensurate to the growth observed in recent pre-Covid times. There were nearly half as many more inheritance claims in the High Court last year compared to the previous year. People have been alerted in this regard due to a few proceedings that have been well publicised.Share This:-
Company shares are often forgotten about when negotiating financial settlements to a divorce alongside the broader issue of pensions. This can obviously be a crucial income stream if only one party provided the family income. Pensions are usually divided equally. You need to re-institute legal proceedings if you forget this valuable asset!Share This:-
A recent High Court challenge by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) to sever the commercial lease for its offices was won by its landlord the Canary Wharf Group. The EMA complained that its lease signed in 2014 for 25 years had been frustrated by Brexit which it contended was an unforeseen event. The value of the lease is £500m and the EMA intended to move to Amsterdam.Share This:-
Banging on the ceiling, screams of abuse, depression, 21 month vendetta, veiled threats, shouting, intimidating emails, distress, anxiety, reduced sale price, overgrown garden blocking light, tenants feeling petrified. If you are the victim of the aforementioned a civil harassment and nuisance damages claim may be appropriate at the county court.Share This:-
Statutory demands are usually issued as a strong arm tactic to obtain funds from someone as the fear of an impending bankruptcy petition usually works. The courts do not encourage their use as a means of enforcing a judgement. Today the debt has to be in excess of £5000 for a petition to be issued. The demand can be made on any of the available forms as this will not effect its validity. After the demands service, by a process server, 21 days have to be allowed to give the debtor time to either pay or negotiate a settlement to the satisfaction of the creditor. A petition for bankruptcy has to be served within 4 months of service of the demand. The debtor can if good reason exists apply to the court to set aside the demand within 18 days of it service. However if the sum demanded is that which has been ordered by a court to be payed to the creditor and the debtor has applied for permission to appeal in good time or an appeal is underway then:-
Rule 10.24(2) of the Insolvency (England and Wales) Rules 2016 provides:-
‘If the petition is brought in respect of a judgment debt, or a sum ordered by any court to be paid, the court may stay or dismiss the petition on the ground that an appeal is pending from the judgment or order, or that execution of the judgment has been stayed.’
This is an important defence and may be sufficient to deter even the most litigiously well resourced creditor. However it should be noted that the mere issuance of a bankruptcy petition by the court has the effect of a notification being sent by the court to the Chief Land Registrar who will make entries to the effect on any Land Registry entries that the alleged debtor may have (i.e. property ownership) which will also effect any charges e.g. by mortgagors that are registered. Therefore a bankruptcy does not have to be granted, when full restrictions will be notified to the Chief Land Registrar, for entries to be made to the register that may subsequently need to be removed.
What is a reasonable amount of time to wait for a service?
A common consumer complaint has statutory constraints that it would seem timely to remind you of.
If a contract between a consumer and a supplier was entered into before the 1st October 2015 the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 applies. In particular section 14 provides:-
Section 14 Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982
14 Implied term about time for performance.
(1) Where, under a relevant contract for the supply of a service by a supplier acting in the course of a business, the time for the service to be carried out is not fixed by the contract, left to be fixed in a manner agreed by the contract or determined by the course of dealing between the parties, there is an implied term that the supplier will carry out the service within a reasonable time.
(2) What is a reasonable time is a question of fact.
If your contract was entered into on or after the 1st October 2015 then the Consumer Rights Act 2015 applies. In particular section 52 provides:-
Section 52 Consumer Rights Act 2015
52 Service to be performed within a reasonable time
(1) This section applies to a contract to supply a service, if—
(a) the contract does not expressly fix the time for the service to be performed, and does not say how it is to be fixed, and
(b) information that is to be treated under section 50 as included in the contract does not fix the time either.
(2) In that case the contract is to be treated as including a term that the trader must perform the service within a reasonable time.
(3) What is a reasonable time is a question of fact.
Therefore the consumer has a right to redress in the form of damages in respect of the delay in the performance of a service by a contractor.
The seminal case or authority from which these statutes are derived is Charnock -v- Liverpool Corporation and Kirbys (Commercial) Ltd: 1968 CA. In this case a damaged car went into the garage for repair and it took 8 weeks to complete. The plaintiff sued for the delay and the Court found that it would have taken a competent contractor no longer than 5 weeks. The plaintiff was awarded damages in respect of hiring a replacement car for 3 weeks.
This case also clarifies that:-
i) It is the consumer, here the car owner, to whom the garage owes a duty of care in respect of the service offered rather than the paying insurance company.
ii) That it is incumbent on the contractor, in this case the garage, to inform the consumer immediately about any reasons why their order may be delayed so that they are free to take their business elsewhere. For example, an agreement that exists with a preferred supplier to carry out an order within a specified time period. It is common for contractors seeking to retain the client’s business not to inform the client of any such factors early on. However in such cases the untimely contractor is now caught by the Acts.
“I’ve Been Disinherited By My Parents Will” is a common cry for help we at the Solicitors Information Service have been hearing recently.
People unable to get onto the property latter and an ageing population with rising levels of dementia are the key factors boosting a rise in disputes over wills. The recent Supreme Court case Ilott v The Blue Cross and others has confirmed that a will should be left intact unless exceptional circumstances prevail e.g. as provided in the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975.
Legal commentators have predicted a massive surge in court cases as people try and test out whether they have a valid claim.Share This:-