This week's edition of Property Disputes weekly highlights includes: a Court of Appeal decision finding that the tenancy condition in section 81 Housing Act 1985 can be satisfied even where the tenant does not intend to return to the premises as a tenant, High Court decisions on the court’s jurisdiction to determine whether in point of law a particular debt is a ‘moratorium debt’ under the Debt Respite Scheme, and the causal link that must be established between the negligent advice and subsequent conduct of a property developer, on the interpretation of restrictions in a nomination rights deed on the disposal of property, on a parties’ termination clause which was found to exclude the ‘breach of contract principle’, a decision that a short LTA 1987 section 22 notice period was immaterial in light of landlord’s continued failure to remedy issues, and whether or not a right to forfeit had arisen. Upper Tribunal decisions on compensation for loss of amenity flowing from a redevelopment scheme and the court exercising its discretion to modify a restrictive covenant affecting land and overruling the First-tier Tribunal’s decision not to determine service charges due to lack of information, and a decision that a lawful assignee assuming primary responsibility for obligations in the licence agreement will be party to the Code agreement. It also includes a snapshot of key property developments to look out for in 2025.

This week's edition of Property Disputes weekly highlights includes: the MHCLG consultation on an exemption from the ground rent cap, High Court decisions regarding an unjust enrichment claim for disputed service charges, a property unfit for human habitation, and postponement of a possession order, and Upper Tribunal decisions on the Electronic Communications Code and rating valuation.

This week's edition of Property Disputes weekly highlights includes: a Supreme Court decision on Japanese Knotweed, High Court decisions on a lease granted in breach of directors’ duties, boundary determination, and staying bankruptcy proceedings, and Sheriff Appeal Court decisions on the right to occupy property and the sale of a home in bankruptcy.

This week's edition of Property Disputes weekly highlights includes: an Upper Tribunal decision upholding the First-tier Tribunal’s application of property valuation principles in the context of a lease extension, High Court decisions regarding procedural defects in partnership claims, the dismissal of a provision claim in a joint tenancy severance order, the dismissal of estoppel, and probate and possession claims and counterclaims and analysis of a High Court decision on satisfying the equity arising from proprietary estoppel. It also includes judgments in Scottish property disputes and news items regarding the opening of the New London Tribunals Centre in February 2026 and publication of the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government’s template access agreement for buildings covered by the Developer Remediation Contract.

This Practice Note contains links to Q&As on the most frequently-asked questions in property disputes. The answers are not maintained and therefore reflect the law on the date on which they were published. For up to date guidance and further detail, follow the links within each answer. Leases and licences Licences, tenancies at will and periodic tenancies • If a landlord does not know when the periods of a lease start and end (there is no formal documentation for the lease and the landlord has recently acquired the reversion) how can they determine the date required to serve a valid section 25 notice? • In a periodic business lease where there is no written lease but annual rent is paid quarterly, what notice must the tenant give to terminate? • Where a property is held jointly by two individuals as tenants in common, and there is a licensee that refuses to vacate the property: (a) can one joint owner sign and serve a valid notice to quit on the licensee; and (b) can the same joint owner, on the expiry

This new starter guide provides an introduction to Property Disputes (PD). It is aimed at trainee solicitors and those who are new to PD as a practice area. It focuses on the key issues that arise in PD and includes links to other Lexis+® UK sources and materials which provide more comprehensive information on the topics covered. Those who are new to PD are also likely to find the Overviews in each of the subtopics in the PD practice area useful. They give an introduction to each of the subtopics with links to relevant content within the subtopic to help navigate the area concerned. For an example, see: Property insolvency—overview. The PD module also has a Property Disputes introductory materials topic, which contains links to training materials and “How to guides”, “Quick guides” and checklists and flowcharts. The PD module focuses on property disputes in England and Wales, with a separate subtopic focussing on Scottish property disputes (see: Property disputes in Scotland—overview). Where something is not covered in this guide, use the PD practice area

The following Property Disputes resources, providing useful practical commentary, legislation, rules and guidance for Property Disputes lawyers, whether in private practice or in-house, are available in Lexis+® UK. They are referenced and linked to in the Property Disputes content in Lexis+® UK. Please note, however, the titles listed can only be accessed with the relevant Lexis+® UK subscription(s). General Title Summary Who should use this resource? Halsbury's Laws of England volumes relevant for Property Disputes lawyers:• Halsbury's Laws of England, Bankruptcy and Individual Insolvency (Volume 5 (2020))• Halsbury's Laws of England, Boundaries (Volume 4 (2026))• Halsbury's Laws of England, Civil procedure (Volumes 11–12 (2020))• Halsbury's Laws of England, Contract (Volume 22 (2025))• Halsbury's Laws of England, Conveyancing (Volume 23 (2023))• Halsbury's Laws of England, Court and Tribunals (Volume 24A (2025))• Halsbury's Laws of England, Damages (Volume 29 (2024))• Halsbury's Laws of England, Estoppel (Volume 29 (2021))• Halsbury's Laws of England, Housing (Volume 56 (2022))• Halsbury's Laws of England, Landlord and Tenant (Volume 62–64 (2022))• Halsbury's Laws of England, Limitation periods (Volume 68 (2021))• Halsbury's Laws of England, Mortgage (Volume 77 (2021))•

Property joint ventures are typically structured in one of three ways: • contractual agreement • partnership • limited liability company Contractual agreement This is the simplest form of joint venture, and there are many occasions where a ‘simple’ project management agreement, development management agreement, or collaboration agreement (usually under which one party provides a service in return for an agreed share of any eventual profit) will be an appropriate way to proceed. Typical types of collaboration agreement are asset, property, or investment management agreements. The advantages of such an agreement are: • flexibility and relative simplicity (there are no formalities as to the nature of the agreement) • confidentiality (there are no registration or reporting requirements) • each joint venturer is taxed in accordance with their individual circumstances However, there are also significant disadvantages with such an agreement: • there is no separate legal entity within which the liabilities of the joint venture can be ring-fenced or which is capable of entering into contracts in its own right • the capacity to raise finance

A property joint venture is an arrangement between two or more parties under which they combine disparate contributions in order to derive value from the development, acquisition or management of property. Although in the vast majority of instances that value will be measured in terms of income or capital profits, there are some joint venturers (such as local authorities) who participate for social reasons (eg in relation to urban regeneration schemes, community projects, etc). The contributions made by the joint venturers will usually involve some combination of: • cash, or the ability to enter into financing commitments • tangible assets (eg land) • intangible assets (eg expertise, intellectual property, construction services, contractual rights, etc) The parties who typically participate in property joint ventures include property companies, developers, onshore institutional investors, offshore investors, landowners, local authorities and other public sector organisations. Why enter into a property joint venture? A property joint venture allows the parties to it to: • share risk, and also to place specialist risk with specialist participants • combine resources to leverage the scale

The Property Litigation Association (PLA) has published guidance for members on dealing with Business and Property claims at the Central London County Court (CLCC). This follows a 2024 PLA survey which highlighted members’ frustrations with court service levels. The guidance, developed after meetings between the PLA's Law Reform Committee and CLCC judiciary and staff, provides practical steps for members dealing with Business and Property court claims including methods of contacting the court, filing procedures and problem solving and complaints.

The Property Standardisation Group (PSG) has published two new style offers namely an Offer to enter into a minute of variation and Offer to accept a renunciation and related guidance.

An order made within divorce/dissolution, separation or nullity proceedings providing for the transfer or settlement of property.