This question raises the issue of the enforceability of covenants affecting land against successors in title of the original covenantee. In particular it concerns the interplay between the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982 (LG(MP)A 1982), the Local Land Charges Act 1975 (LLCA 1975) and the Land Registration Act 2002 (LRA 2002). When A enters into a covenant with B affecting the use of land, it is enforceable as a matter of privity of contract. As soon as either A or B transfers the interest held in the land, as between the respective landowners that privity no longer exists. The starting point is that the burden of a positive covenant will not usually run: Rhone v Stephens. Where however a covenant

A disposition of property granted by a party who has no title to it. This was a legitimate device for making good a lack of title if the grantee occupied the property openly peaceably and without judicial interruption for a period of ten years, following the registration of the a non domino disposition. Since 8 December 2014 with the introduction of the Land Registration etc (Scotland) Act 2012 (LRE(S)A 2012), a party looking to acquire title to land where no owner can be traced must comply with the prescriptive claimant provisions in LRE(S)A 2012, ss 43–45 before submitting an a non domino disposition for registration

CPR 36.11(1) provides that a Part 36 offer is accepted by serving written notice of acceptance on the offeror and may be accepted at any time unless it has already been withdrawn, though in certain circumstances the permission of the court is required to accept the offer. CPR 36.14 expressly deals with the consequences of non-payment of an accepted Part 36 offer. CPR 36.14(1) provides that if a Part 36 offer is accepted, the claim is stayed,

The regulation of consumer credit Regulation of consumer credit now sits with the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA). In consequence parts of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (CCA 1974) were repealed from 1 April 2014 with regulated activities coming under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (FSMA 2000) and the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Regulated Activities) Order 2001 (SI 2001/544) (RAO 2001). Regulated activities and consumer credit agreements Entering into a regulated credit agreement as a lender is a specified (regulated) kind of activity unless it is an exempt agreement under Articles 60C to 60H

We have assumed that the proceedings were commenced after 10 January 2015 and that enforcement is taking place under Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast). Appealing the registration of a foreign judgment When seeking to enforce a foreign judgment in England and Wales, the foreign judgment will need to be registered in the English courts. The rules in CPR 74.1 provide for this. Where a foreign judgment has been registered, the defendant in the claim is able to make an appeal against that registration. This is provided for in CPR 74.8. The timing for making an appeal is set out in CPR 74.8(4) as follows: ‘(4) The appellant's notice must be served— (a) where the appeal is against the granting of registration, within— (i) one month; or (ii) where service is to be effected on a party

It is often the case that, where a dispute arises over the terms of a Will, or a claim is intimated for reasonable financial provision out of the estate by a qualifying person under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975, a compromise will be reached by way of a deed of variation of the Will. This is often tax efficient and allows for the beneficiaries to re-write the terms of the Will to make provision for the party bringing the challenge. The purpose of a deed of variation is formally to

Arbitration analysis: This case involved an application to Commercial Court of the City of St Petersburg and Leningrad Region (the ‘Russian Court’) to prohibit initiation or continuation of legal proceedings in a foreign court and in the international arbitration, seated outside RF. The claimant, a Russian company, commenced proceedings in the Russian Court against the Respondent for breach of contract, despite the existence of the valid ICC arbitration agreement between the parties. The Respondent obtained an anti-suit injunction from the English court, however, the Russian Court proceeded to uphold the claimant’s claim, and, furthermore, awarded the claimant its application for an anti-suit injunction against the Respondent, as well as ordered the Respondent to pay punitive damages to the claimant. Written by Irina Tymczyszyn FCIArb, arbitrator and counsel, Tymczyszyn Arbitration.

The purpose of registering is to allow enforcement in the latter jurisdiction based on a court order (judgment) from the former. The procedure for enforcing judgments from Scotland is set out in sections 18 and 19 and Schedules 6 and 7 to the Civil Jurisdiction

An assured shorthold tenancy (AST) with the protection of the Housing Act 1988 (HA 1988) can only be brought to an end by the landlord by a court order following the service of a notice alleging a breach of its terms, or by a notice under HA 1988, s 21. This question raises the issue of how such a notice should be served. HA 1988, s 21 envisages that notices can be served to take effect in two circumstances: following the end of a fixed contractual term or during a periodic tenancy. In each case, it is provided that to make the possession order the court must be satisfied that 'the landlord or, in the case of joint landlords, at least one of them has given to the tenant not less than two months' notice in writing'. It is necessary therefore to consider the requirements

In a case such as this, where the claimant has sued the wrong defendant, should the defendant: • acknowledge service and then dispute the court’s jurisdiction? If so, on what grounds would the defendant dispute jurisdiction? • acknowledge service and file and serve a defence and then apply for strike out on the basis that the statement of claim is defective in that it names the wrong defendant? • acknowledge service and file and serve a defence and then apply for summary judgment? What would be the basis for summary judgment? In a scenario such as this, where a party has brought a claim against another party against whom they have no basis to claim, it is likely that the court will strike out

Valid execution of a transfer by an attorney The requirements of HM Land Registry (HMLR) for the execution of a transfer by an attorney are set out in the Land Registration Rules 2003, SI 2003/1417, rr 61–63 and in HM Land Registry Practice Guide 9: powers of attorney and registered land. These requirements mean that an application to register a transfer executed by an attorney under an ordinary power of attorney (as opposed to a lasting power of attorney) must include either the original power, a copy of the power by means of which its contents

Financial Services analysis: Victims of APP fraud have long searched for a viable way of claiming recompense from banks involved in the transactions. Recent efforts have focused on the Quincecare duty. This quest for the Northwest Passage of the banking fraud world has largely been in vain. Hamblin v Moorwand shows one way through the polar ice: a derivative claim on behalf of a defrauded company involved in the payment chain. But that route may be best left to the brave. Simon Oakes, barrister at Quadrant Chambers.