header-logo header-logo

03 June 2020
Issue: 7889 / Categories: Legal News , Procedure & practice , Property
printer mail-detail

NLJ this week: Stay on housing possession cases

PD 51Z: managing court capacity & protecting public health

The stay on housing possession cases, brought in by Practice Direction (PD) 51Z, could continue beyond the current 25 June cut-off point or even lead to long-term change, barristers have predicted.

PD 51Z came into force on 27 March and was intended to last 90 days, with the purpose of managing court capacity and protecting public health. In NLJ this week, Julian Gun Cuninghame, Gough Square, and Romana Canneti, 4 King’s Bench Walk, write: ‘138,000 possession claims are brought every year in the county courts: their possession lists go on all day, with large numbers of people awaiting their five-minute hearings milling unhygienically around the court buildings.’

Therefore, ‘given the current capacity of the county courts to handle possession lists, and the risks to public health of possession orders, PD 51Z may well be extended… additional exceptions may also be in the offing.

‘Furthermore, the active risk of a second spike in COVID-19 cases, either this autumn, or at some other time—not to mention the possibility of future national emergencies—suggests that PD 51Z may bring permanent changes to the Civil Procedure Rules, whether by rule change or a new PD.’

Lobbying of the Master of the Rolls by the Property Bar Association and the Property Litigation Association preceded an amendment to PD 51Z on 17 April 2020 (effective from 20 April 2020). It created three exceptions to the stay: two relating to squatters, and one allowing applications for case management directions which have been agreed by all the parties.

The barristers highlight recent cases from the Court of Appeal and point out that, when the stay is finally lifted, ‘the courts will be dealing with a huge backlog of possession claims, and roofs will have to be put over the heads of the newly dispossessed, not least to protect them from the risks of a second spike’. 

Issue: 7889 / Categories: Legal News , Procedure & practice , Property
printer mail-details
RELATED ARTICLES

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