Axminster: Limitation and forfeiture revisited after Lloyds – Wilberforce Chambers

Posted July 2nd, 2021 in chambers articles, forfeiture, limitations, news, pensions, trusts by sally

‘The High Court (Morgan J.) has delivered judgment in Punter Southall Governance Services Ltd v Hazlett [2021] EWHC 1652 (Ch), concerning the Axminster Carpets Group pension plan. It is now the leading judgment on limitation in claims by pension scheme beneficiaries for arrears. It also gives key guidance on the court’s power to award interest on such claims and on the interpretation and exercise of forfeiture clauses, and makes certain findings on the scope of s.37 of the Pension Schemes Act 1993. This summary only scratches the surface of a detailed 347-paragraph judgment covering several different areas of pensions and trusts law. A more flippant title might have been: “The Axminster Carpets case: a pile of issues…”’

Full Story

Wilberforce Chambers, 24th June 2021

Source: www.wilberforce.co.uk

Supreme Court agrees to hear battle over termination of fixed term secure flexible tenancies – Local Government Lawyer

‘The Supreme Court has granted Croydon Council permission to appeal in a dispute over the termination of fixed term secure flexible tenancies.’

Full Story

Local Government Lawyer, 28th April 2021

Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk

Relief from forfeiture – Don’t dilly dally on the way – Nearly Legal

Posted April 19th, 2021 in appeals, delay, equity, forfeiture, landlord & tenant, news, time limits by tracey

‘Keshwala & Anor v Bhalsod & Anor (2021) EWCA Civ 492. This was the second appeal, to the Court of Appeal, of a relief from forfeiture matter for commercial property that we have previously seen in the High Court (our report here). The issue was whether a relief from forfeiture application made just within 6 months of the date of forfeiture was brought with ‘reasonable promptitude’ for the purposes of the equitable relief from from forfeiture.’

Full Story

Nearly Legal, 18th April 2021

Source: nearlylegal.co.uk

Contentious Wills & Probate Part III – Parklane Plowden Chambers

Posted February 19th, 2021 in chambers articles, forfeiture, news, probate, wills by sally

‘Last year there were two reported decisions in respect of the forfeiture rule. These are worth mention given the rarity of reported cases in this area.’

Full Story

Parklane Plowden Chambers, 17th February 2021

Source: www.parklaneplowden.co.uk

Lancashire Hot Pot – waiver of forfeiture and landlord knowledge of breach – Nearly Legal

Posted January 27th, 2021 in covenants, forfeiture, landlord & tenant, leases, news, rent by sally

‘On 22nd January the Court of Appeal handed down its judgment in the case of Faiz v Burnley Borough Council (2021) EWCA Civ 55. Judgment dismissing the appeal was given by Lewison LJ; with whom Arnold and Asplin LLJs agreed. The case came on appeal from the decision of HHJ Halliwell (2020) EWHC 407 (Ch).’

Full Story

Nearly Legal, 26th January 2021

Source: nearlylegal.co.uk

The importance of acting with “reasonable promptitude” when applying for relief from forfeiture: Keshwala and another v Bhalsod [2020] EWHC 2372 (QB) – Hardwicke Chambers

‘The tenants (Claimants) had a twenty-year lease of 89 Narborough Road, Leicester (Property) which commenced on 12 March 2008. The Property consisted of a lock-up shop on the ground floor with residential accommodation above. The Claimants mistakenly paid only £1,500 of the £2,000 quarterly instalment of rent that fell due in June 2018, leaving arrears of £500.’

Full Story

Hardwicke Chambers, 14th October 2020

Source: hardwicke.co.uk

Relief from the forfeiture rule: Amos v Mancini [2020] EWHC 1063 (Ch) and Challen v Challen [2020] EWHC 1330 (Ch) – Radcliffe Chambers

Posted October 19th, 2020 in appeals, chambers articles, families, forfeiture, news, unlawful killing by sally

‘Two cases this year demonstrate the court’s approach to claims for relief from the forfeiture rule. The first case concerns Sandra Amos’ claim following her conviction of causing the death of her husband by careless driving. The second follows the case of Sally Challen, initially convicted of the murder of her husband. Mrs Challen’s conviction was subsequently quashed by the Court of Appeal and her guilty plea to manslaughter was later accepted by the Crown.’

Full Story

Radcliffe Chambers, 7th October 2020

Source: radcliffechambers.com

For this relief, much thanks – Nearly Legal

Posted October 5th, 2020 in appeals, debts, delay, forfeiture, landlord & tenant, leases, news, rent by tracey

‘Keshwala & Anor v Bhalsod & Anor (2020) EWHC 2372 (QB). An appeal from a Circuit Judge’s decision refusing relief from forfeiture, focussing on the issue of delay in making the application for relief. This was a commercial lease, though with living accommodation above. Mr Keshwala had taken a 20 year lease of the property in 2008. In 2015, the current freeholder had bought the freehold. Also in 2015, the rent first fell into arrears. The freeholder forfeited by re-entry and Mr K obtained relief from forfeiture on payment of arrears and costs.’

Full Story

Nearly Legal, 4th October 2020

Source: nearlylegal.co.uk

Croydon LBC v Kalonga [2020] EWHC 1353 (QB) – Tanfield Chambers

Posted August 27th, 2020 in forfeiture, housing, landlord & tenant, leases, news, repossession by sally

‘The “flexible tenancy” was the latest, and mercifully the last, in a long line of new “tenancies” created by Parliament to address perceived deficiencies within social housing. The flexible tenancy is a fixed term secure tenancy that is capable of determination at the end of its term by not becoming a secure periodic tenancy. Its purpose was to enable a greater churn of social housing and to ensure that such housing went to those tenants in greatest housing need. The flexible tenancy did not prove popular—there are said to be only 30,000 flexible tenancies in existence—and Parliament’s proposal to make such tenancies mandatory (under the Housing and Planning Act 2016) has never been brought into force.’

Full Story

Tanfield Chambers, 11th August 2020

Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk

Croydon London Borough Council v Kalonga (2020) EWHC 1353 (QB) – Tanfield Chambers

‘A landlord under a fixed-term flexible tenancy did not have any right to determine the tenancy prior to the expiry of the fixed term because the tenancy agreement did not contain a forfeiture clause. The tenancy did not fall within the ambit of s82(1)(b) Housing Act 1985 and the landlord could only seek possession under s107D at the end of the fixed term.’

Full Story

Tanfield Chambers, 30th June 2020

Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk

Coronavirus and property: keep taking the medicine – Falcon Chambers

‘In the midst of the coronavirus pandemic Parliament has been, and continues to be, very active. This note provides a quick update in relation to the latest developments on four fronts: (1) forfeiture; (2) CRAR; (3) insolvency; (4) planning.’

Full Story

Falcon Chambers, 29th June 2020

Source: www.falcon-chambers.com

Why victims can sometimes inherit from their abusers- even if they kill them – OUP Blog

‘It is a basic rule of English law that a person who kills someone should not inherit from their victim. The justification behind the rule, known as the forfeiture rule, is that a person should not benefit from their crimes and therefore forfeits entitlement. Many other jurisdictions have the same basic rule for fundamental reasons of public policy, including the need to avoid incentivising homicide. Importantly, however, Parliament passed the Forfeiture Act 1982 to give courts in England and Wales discretion to modify the application of the rule in certain cases, so that some people could inherit from those they had killed after all. Such modification is also possible in some other jurisdictions: It allows judges to consider individual circumstances where the blanket application of a forfeiture rule would cause injustice.’

Full Story

OUP Blog, 3rd July 2020

Source: blog.oup.com

Adventures in forfeiture – brothels and specifying the breach – Nearly Legal

‘An Upper Tribunal appeal of an FTT decision that the leaseholder, Ms M, was in breach of lease, and specifically a restriction “Not to do or permit or suffer in or upon the Demised Premises or any part thereof any illegal or immoral act or any act or thing which may be or may become a nuisance or annoyance or cause damage to the Lessors or the tenants of the Lessor or the occupiers of any part of the Building.”’

Full Story

Nearly Legal, 1st July 2020

Source: nearlylegal.co.uk

Landlord’s knowledge of breach: waiver of forfeiture Faiz v Burnley BC [2020] EWCA 407 (Ch); 2 WLUK 318 (Ch D) – St Ives Chambers

Posted July 1st, 2020 in appeals, chambers articles, covenants, forfeiture, landlord & tenant, news, rent by sally

‘The High Court in Faiz considered the interrelationship between a landlord’s knowledge and the date of accrual of a tenant’s liability and their effect on waiver of forfeiture.’

Full Story

St Ives Chambers, June 2020

Source: www.stiveschambers.co.uk

Waiver of the right to forfeit – Hardwicke Chambers

‘The recent case of Faiz & Ors v Burnley Borough Council [2020] EWHC 407 (Ch) provides clarity on a tricky practical issue: when can a landlord accept monies after it gains knowledge of its right to forfeit?’

Full Story

Hardwicke Chambers, 17th June 2020

Source: hardwicke.co.uk

Croydon LBC v Kalonga [2020] EWHC 1353 (QB) Tipples J – Landmark Chambers

‘A flexible tenancy is a species of secure tenancy which is granted for a fixed term of at least two years (s.107A-D, Housing Act 1985). At the end of the fixed term, the landlord has a mandatory ground for possession (s.107D). During the fixed term, commentators have differed on how the landlord can terminate the tenancy. In Flexible Tenancies and Forfeiture, [2014] Journal of Housing Law 17 (Andrew Dymond), it was suggested that the tenancy needed to include a forfeiture clause and the fixed term needed to be terminated by way of forfeiture (see s.82(3), 1985 Act). By contrast, in In a Fix New Law Journal, 29 June 2012 (Jon Holbrook), it was suggested that a flexible tenancy could be determined in the same manner as a periodic secure tenancy, i.e. by the landlord obtaining and executing an order for possession.’

Full Story

Landmark Chambers, 2nd June 2020

Source: www.landmarkchambers.co.uk

Wife who beat husband to death with a hammer permitted to inherit his estate: Challen v Challen [2020] EWHC 1330 (Ch) – New Square Chambers

‘On 15 August 2010 Sally Challen beat her husband to death with a hammer, wrapped him in a curtain before washing the dishes and driving home. She was convicted of murder on 23 June 2011 and sentenced to life imprisonment, but last year that conviction was quashed by the Court of Appeal. Before the retrial the Crown accepted a guilty plea to a lesser charge of Manslaughter by reason of diminished responsibility, and Mrs Challen was released, having already served her sentence. The Forfeiture rule prevented her inheriting her husband’s estate or taking their joint assets by succession, and in September 2019 she issued proceedings under the Forfeiture Act 1982 for relief.’

Full Story

New Square Chambers, June 2020

Source: www.newsquarechambers.co.uk

High Court judge hands down ruling on secure flexible tenancies and possession during fixed term – Local Government Lawyer

A landlord cannot determine a flexible tenancy prior to the expiry of its fixed term without a forfeiture clause even in the event of default by the tenant, the High Court has ruled.

Full Story

Local Government Lawyer, 4th June 2020

Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk

Relief from Forfeiture following Manslaughter: Challen v Challen [2020] EWHC 1330 (Ch) – Hardwicke Chambers

‘In this recent case, described by the presiding judge HHJ Matthews as “extraordinary [with] a fatal combination of conditions and events”, relief from forfeiture was granted despite the applicant having pleaded guilty to manslaughter with a resulting sentence of over nine years of imprisonment.’

Full Story

Hardwicke Chambers, 29th May 2020

Source: hardwicke.co.uk

Causing the death of another and the Forfeiture Rule: Amos v Mancini [2020] EWHC 1063 (Ch) – New Square Chambers

Posted May 29th, 2020 in dangerous driving, forfeiture, married persons, news, wills by sally

‘In January 2019 Mrs Amos, aged 74, was driving with her husband near their home in Llandeilo, when they collided with the car in front. Her husband later died from his injuries and Mrs Amos pleaded guilty to causing death by dangerous driving and was given a suspended prison sentence and disqualified from driving. The question arose whether she was prevented from benefitting under her husband’s will, or from receiving by survivorship his share of their home, which was owned as beneficial joint tenants.’

Full Story

New Square Chambers, 12th May 2020

Source: www.newsquarechambers.co.uk