Where a property is jointly owned, then, unless prevented by law, each owner has a right of occupation of the property. It is therefore not lawful for one spouse to change the locks to the jointly-owned matrimonial home unilaterally. A party who has been locked out can simply contact a locksmith to unlock the door and change the locks again or could enter using reasonable force. However, in such circumstances, it is unwise to use self-help methods and will be better to have recourse to negotiation and if necessary, the legal process. If locks have been changed, it is sometimes possible to enlist the police to require entry, although in the domestic context, the police are often reluctant to assist. Some forces will provide support

The higher rates of the stamp duty land tax (SDLT) apply to the purchase of a major interest in a single dwelling by an individual, if at the end of the day of purchase, conditions A to D are met: • Condition A—the chargeable consideration is £40,000 or more • Condition B—the dwelling is not subject to a lease which

A successful deposit protection claim by one joint tenant of an assured shorthold tenancy (AST) will not always prevent other tenants from bringing 'deposit protection claims'. The deposit cannot be the subject of more than one Court order, but the other tenants may have claims to other statutory awards of money. It is assumed the deposit was received by or on behalf of the landlord on or after 6 April 2012, and the other tenants have made claims arising out of tenancy protection failures relating to an AST which are not statute barred. This note considers the law relating to England and assumes all claims are against the landlord not others. In Wales different statutory provisions apply. If the deposit was received before 6 April 2012 different statutory provisions apply. To understand the question,

A restrictive covenant is automatically extinguished where the freehold of both the land benefiting and the land burdened become vested in the same person (provided that person holds the land in the same capacity, for example it does not hold one freehold in its personal capacity and the other

Highway authorities have responsibility for the maintenance and upkeep of highways, which includes being granted significant powers to ensure that the highways are not obstructed or encroached upon save where there is specific statutory authority to allow for the same (for example the temporary placement under licence of builder’s skips). Section 143 of the Highways Act 1980 (HiA 1980) provides that where a structure has been erected or set up on a highway otherwise than under a provision of HiA 1980 or some other enactment, a competent authority may by notice require the person having control or

Who owns a public highway? Some highway land is merely vested in the highway authority and other highway land belongs completely to the authority. The Local Government Act 1929 (LGA 1929) vested the highways in the highway authorities, but the meaning of that vesting was not completely clear until Tithe Redemption Commission v Runcorn was decided in the Court of Appeal in 1954. The main judgment in Tithe Redemption Commission was given by Sir Raymond Evershed, one of Lord Denning's predecessors as Master of the Rolls. The 1954 Master helpfully reviewed the previous cases, notably: • Rolls v St George the Martyr, Southwark, Vestry • Mayor of Tunbridge Wells v Baird • Foley's Charity Trustees v Dudley Corporation The current statute is, of course, the Highways Act 1980 (HiA 1980), which, in HiA 1980, s 263, restates the provision in LGA 1929 that the

The duty to make reasonable adjustments, at sections 20–21 of the Equality Act 2010 (EqA 2010), comprises three requirements. The element that is common to all three requirements is that they will only apply where a disabled person is put at a substantial disadvantage in relation to a ‘relevant matter’ in comparison with persons who are not disabled. The distinction between the three requirements is that each one contemplates a different cause of that substantial disadvantage: • the first requirement applies where a ‘provision, criterion or practice’ applied by or on behalf of the person subject to the duty (eg the employer) causes such a disadvantage • the second requirement applies where a ‘physical feature’ causes it • the third applies where a disabled person would be put at such a disadvantage if an ‘auxiliary aid’

The second edition of the protocol came into force on 9 November 2016, however it does not contain any transitional measures to deal with the situation where parties have commenced the process under the first edition prior to this

Help to buy ISAs were introduced from Autumn 2015 as a tax-free cash account aimed at encouraging first-time buyers to save for a UK residential property. As well as receiving interest on the balance tax-free, the government will supplement the amount saved with a 25% bonus (up to a maximum of £3,000) when the property is purchased. To qualify, first the individual must be a qualifying individual as defined

A lease can be forfeited only in two ways. The first is by peaceable re-entry; the second by the bringing of legal proceedings. Forfeiture must be carried out by way of a final and positive act which cannot be retracted (Serjeant v Nash) and must be accompanied by an intention to forfeit. Forfeiture brings the lease to an end. Forfeiture is not limited to commercial leases but can arise in respect of residential leases also, provided that the lease contains a forfeiture clause. Peaceable re-entry requires some form of actual physical re-entry onto the whole of the demised land. Entry onto part only is sufficient if the lease

Intestacy The order of distribution of a deceased’s estate on intestacy is set out in the table in section 46 of the Administration of Estates Act 1925. Rule 22 of the Non-Contentious Probate Rules 1987 (NCPR 1987), SI 1987/2024 establishes the order of priority of those who are entitled to apply for the grant of letters of administration, beginning with the spouse or civil partner then the children and thereafter other relatives. NCPR 1987, SI 1987/2024, r 27 contains provisions where there are two or more persons entitled in the same degree and NCPR 1987, SI 1987/2024, r 27(6) provides that a dispute between persons entitled to a grant in the same degree shall be determined by the Probate Registry. A and B as the two biological children would normally be entitled in the same degree to a grant and if in agreement can determine

For information on gifts with reservation of benefit (GWR), see Practice Note: IHT—gifts with reservation of benefit. In addition, Schedule 20 to the Finance Act 1986 includes a set of rules for tracing a GWR which has changed ownership or which has been exchanged or altered after the original gift. See Commentary: GWR—tracing changes to the property given: Simon's Taxes, [I3.419] In this case, the original gift was of cash, which was then used to purchase the property; therefore the tracing rules do not appear to apply. Nonetheless, it is possible that HMRC would try to argue that there had been a GWR by virtue of 'associated