header-logo header-logo

26 November 2020 / Andrew Francis
Issue: 7912 / Categories: Features , Property
printer mail-detail

Avoiding the stigma of cynical breach

32874
What can we learn from the Supreme Court’s judgment in Alexander Devine Children’s Cancer Trust v Housing Solutions Ltd, asks Andrew Francis
  • The Supreme Court has just emphasised the importance of the applicant’s conduct in applications to discharge, or modify restrictive covenants under s 84(1) Law of Property Act 1925. What can we learn from the judgment of that Court?

On 6 November 2020, the Supreme Court handed down its judgment in Alexander Devine Children’s Cancer Trust v Housing Solutions Ltd [2020] UKSC 45, [2020] All ER (D) 37 (Nov).

This article suggests that some lessons can be learnt from that judgment. It concentrates on those lessons and does not set out the facts in any detail. For those, reference can be made to the judgment itself, as well as to the other commentaries on the decision.

In this case the Supreme Court upheld the decision of the Court of Appeal in November 2018 which had allowed the Trust’s appeal against the decision of the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) (UTLC). It had allowed the application by Housing Solutions

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll