Chris Bryden

This Q&A considers waivers by implication or estoppel in a contractual option where one party requires the other to take a transfer of land.

This Q&A considers the position of a tenant who serves a break notice but does not vacate on the given date in a Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 protected commercial lease, which contains a break clause which does not require the tenant to give vacant possession as a condition precedent to operating the break clause.

In a lease extension matter it is believed that the landlord’s solicitors did not have authority from their client to sign the section 45 counter-notice under the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 which was served and therefore believed to be invalid. The landlord’s solicitors have confirmed that they were given such authority from the landlord to sign the counter-notice however they have refused to provide evidence of this upon request. Is there any way to compel the landlord’s solicitors to provide evidence of the authority?The landlord’s solicitors have confirmed that they were given such authority from the landlord to sign the counter-notice however they have refused to provide evidence of this upon request.Is there any way to compel the landlord's solicitors to provide evidence of the authority?Part II of the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 (LRHUDA 1993) allows a tenant to acquire a new lease of their flat by service of a notice under LRHUDA 1993, s 42. The landlord is permitted by LRHUDA 1993, s 45 to serve a counter-notice setting out whether the landlord accepts the right to acquire a new lease and if so which terms they dispute.By LRHUDA 1993, s 99(5), any notice given under LRHUDA 1993, ss 13 or 42 must be signed by each of the tenants or (as the case may be) by the tenant by whom it is given, and in any other case can be signed by or on behalf of each of the tenants. There is no corresponding requirement for a LRHUDA 1993, s 45 counter-notice to be signed, although they commonly are.Where a counter-notice is signed without authority by a solicitor on behalf of the client, it is possible that the counter-notice is invalid in the event that it was also sent without authority. In the event that the counter-notice is invalid, the court is obliged to grant a new lease on the terms set out in the LRHUDA 1993, s 42 notice. However, in this scenario although there is a belief that there was a lack of authority, there appears to be no evidence to support this contention, and a positive assertion that the solicitor did have such authority. In such circumstances it is likely to be virtually impossible for the tenant to demonstrate that this is not the case. In the face of a clear representation of authority by the solicitors, the tenant is not likely to be allowed to seek to go behind this. There is no mechanism to compel a solicitor to provide evidence of the scope of their instructions or authority to an opposing party. The solicitor has ostensible or apparent authority to sign a counter-notice, and here positively asserts actual authority.In those circumstances there is no way to compel the solicitor to disclose or provide evidence of their authority. If the matter proceeded to tribunal the contention could be made that the notice was invalid and questions could be asked in evidence as to whether the landlord gave such authority, but it is highly likely that such authority would be confirmed given the representations already made by the solicitor.For further reading, see Practice Note: Guide to lease extensions of flats under the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993.

This Q&A considers whether a lease granted by a local authority to a registered provider of affordable housing can be assigned to a party that is not a registered provider.

This Q&A considers whether corporate trustees who are the landlord can include clauses limiting the liability of the trustees to the assets of the trust and the options the tenant may have.

This Q&A considers a lease in which the tenant seeks to remove part of a structural wall and the landlord is in agreement. Is it simply a question of the landlord consenting to that work through a licence (and possibly a supplemental lease to reflect the small amount of additional land)? If the lease makes no reference to the tenant’s right to do such work, would the other tenants be entitled to request the landlord refuses consent as per the recent judgment in Duval v 11-13 Rudolph Crescent Ltd.

This Q&A looks at whether a commercial tenant has the protection of the consultation procedure under LTA 1985, section 20.

This Q&A considers the notice which must be given to terminate in a periodic business lease where there is no written lease but annual rent is paid quarterly.

This Q&A considers whether the evidence of a private investigator as to the amount of time that the father is spending with a child be admissible in court and whether an application be required in a private law children case.

This Q&A looks at the personal liability of trustees of a charitable unincorporated association when contracting with third parties.

This Q&A examines whether failure to comply with court directions in a statutory housing appeal requires an application for relief from sanction.

This Q&A considers the rule on reflective loss and whether it might apply where the company is dissolved and no longer capable of restoration.

This Q&A considers whether the rule that a tenant cannot acquire an easement by prescription against another tenant criticised by the court In China Field Ltd v Appeal Tribunal (Buildings) remain good law and if the rule against perpetuities affects this.

This Q&A considers the circumstances where a financial remedy final hearing is cancelled on the morning of the hearing by the court. Can a party’s costs, including barrister’s fees, incurred as a result of the cancelled hearing be recovered and if so, what is the procedure?

This Q&A considers the circumstances where due to coronavirus (COVID-19) guidance, a tenant cannot attend a Practical Completion inspection under an agreement for lease, whether it is reasonable for a landlord to issue a Practical Completion certificate without the tenant in attendance.

This Q&A considers whether, in circumstances where the landlord of an assured shorthold tenancy are two individuals (Landlord A and Landlord B) and Landlord B sells their interest to Landlord A, there is a requirement for Landlord A to serve a notice informing the tenants of a change of landlord (ie a change from the landlord being Landlords A and B jointly to Landlord A solely).

This Q&A considers whether an equivalent of a consent order can be filed with the court stating that an agreement has been reached in a civil dispute where no proceedings have been issued.

This Q&A considers whether an opposing party can take witness statements from minors without the presence of a litigation friend or an appropriate adult in civil proceedings where defendants are minors.

This Q&A considers the extent to which a without prejudice communication between the parties in an employment dispute is admissible.

This Q&A considers whether, in Family Law Act 1996 (FLA 1996) proceedings where no children are involved, permission is required for a party to disclose a transcript of oral evidence, a witness statement or a written judgment to the police if there are no reporting restrictions or similar on the face of the judgement.