James’ property practice covers land registration, boundary disputes, party wall appeals, easements, forfeiture of leases, insolvency, dilapidations, business tenancy renewal and termination and all aspects of residential tenancies, including service charges. James has lectured for many years in the field of business tenancy termination and renewals, both through CLT and in-house. James is experienced in personal and corporate insolvency matters.
Notable Commercial and Property cases
LOAN AND SHARE TRANSFER: Coleman v Mondell  EWHC 2852 (QB)
On the proper construction of their agreement, the parties intended by way of a collateral contract a loan rather than an outright transfer of shares in a Spanish company.
LAND REGISTRATION: Williams v Beshai  UKFTT 0713 (PC). Fraud
Applicant sought registration of a transfer; respondent (the transferor) said that he did not sign either the contract or the TR1. The judge found that although he did not sign the TR1 he did sign the contract. Therefore although the registrar was ordered to cancel the application for registration of the transfer, the judge directed the entry of a notice to protect the contract.
BUSINESS TENANCIES: Gulf Agencies Ltd v Abdul Salam Seid Ahmed (2016)  EWCA Civ 44 CA (Civ Div)
When granting an application for a new tenancy which was opposed by the landlord, a judge had erred in respect of the subjective and objective elements of the landlord’s intention to occupy the premises for the purposes of his own businesses. Although the judgment suggested that the judge implicitly did not believe the landlord in certain respects of his evidence, there was no express finding to that effect or clear reasons for that conclusion, and the landlord had satisfied the necessary evidential test regarding objective intention.
ABUSE OF PROCESS: Singh v Kumar  EWHC 2582 (QB)
A dentist’s claim under an association agreement against an orthodontist for unpaid NHS transitional fees.
RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS: (1) Alan & Gillian Clarke (2) Adrian & Gaynor Davis (3) Arthur & Linda Sanson (4) Karl Bowker  UKUT 0044 (LC)
It was not appropriate to discharge a restrictive covenant preventing homeowners on a small housing estate from erecting fences and other structures on land intended for recreation.
SERVICE CHARGES: Twenty Two Clifton Gardens Limited v Thayer Investments SA  UKUT 71 (LC)
An appeal to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) concerning a freeholder’s efforts to recover the solicitors’ costs and surveyors’ fees of LVT proceedings.
BOUNDARIES: (1) William Rogers (2) Ingrid Rogers v (1) Roger Freeguard (2) Margo Freeguard  1 WLR 375
Extrinsic evidence admissible as an aid to construing the subject matter of an option to purchase property where the description of the property was unclear.