In this Newsflash episode, Lizzie Collin sits down with Richard Snape, Head of Legal Training at Davitt Jones Bould to discuss a recent County Court decision handed down in November concerning Azam v Violet Developments LLP & Ors.

Richard explains the complex background behind the dispute, involving the delayed completion of a major residential and commercial redevelopment in East London, the financial difficulties faced by the developer, and the subsequent forfeiture proceedings brought by the landlord, Mr Azam.

Richard and Lizzie explore:

•How the court approached relief from forfeiture under Section 146 of the Law of Property Act 1925 and the wide discretion available to judges.
•Why delays in practical completion had significant financial consequences, particularly due to the introduction of the Leasehold Reform (Ground Rent) Act 2022.
•The key issue of whether compensation could extend to losses not expressly mentioned in the s146 notice.
•How earlier authorities such as Hyman v Rose, Southern Depot v British Railways Board, and others shaped the court’s conclusion.
•Lessons for landlords, tenants, developers and lenders in managing development obligations, delayed projects, and forfeiture risk.

The judgment, resulting in an award of approximately £1.4 million in compensation, illustrates the scope of the court’s discretion and highlights the importance of drafting, timing and strategic decision-making in property development arrangements.

Other cases mentioned:

- Hyman v Rose [1912]

- Southern Depot v British Railways Board [1990]

Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:

Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email djb.events@djblaw.co.uk for information and booking.This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content.

Get in touch!

Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:

Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email djb.events@djblaw.co.uk for information and booking.

This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content.

Get in touch!

In this Newsflash episode, Lizzie Collin sits down with Richard Snape, Head of Legal Training at Davitt Jones Bould, to discuss the recent County Court decision in Ministry of Sound v British and Foreign Wharf Ltd, a case centred on lease renewals under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954. The dispute concerned the site of the Ministry of Sound nightclub, and explores the legal tests governing redevelopment break clauses, the balance between tenant security and landlord development rights, and how the law evaluates planning prospects over long lease terms.

Richard and Lizzie discuss:
• The background to the Ministry of Sound’s 15-year lease renewal request and the landlord’s desire for a redevelopment break.
• The two-stage test for redevelopment break clauses, including subjective intention and objective “real prospect” of obtaining planning permission.
• How expert evidence shaped the court’s view on the likelihood of residential redevelopment.
• The longstanding principle that the 1954 Act should not stifle development, traced through key authorities.
• How a break notice can be framed as a section 25 notice, enabling landlords to rely on Ground F when terminating a protected tenancy.

This case illustrates the continuing judicial effort to balance commercial certainty for tenants with development flexibility for landlords, providing important guidance for property owners, occupiers, and advisors involved in 1954 Act negotiations and contested lease renewals.

Other cases mentioned:

• Cunliffe v Goodman [1950]
• Hawthorn v Barry UDC (1956)
• National Car Parks Ltd v The Paternoster Consortium Ltd [1990]
• B&M Retail Ltd v HSBC Bank Pension Trust (UK) Ltd [2023]
• Shoal Manufacturing v Clifton Slimline (1967)

Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:

Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email djb.events@djblaw.co.uk for information and booking.This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content.

Get in touch!

Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:

Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email djb.events@djblaw.co.uk for information and booking.

This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content.

Get in touch!

In this Newsflash episode, Lizzie Collin sits down with Richard Snape, Head of Legal Training at Davitt Jones Bould, to discuss the Upper Tribunal decision in Kingdom Hall Trust v Peter Robert Davies. They unpack the complexities of prescriptive easements, focusing on the requirement for a capable grantor and how charitable land status impacts the ability to claim easements.

Richard and Lizzie discuss:
• The background and legal fiction behind prescriptive easements and “lost modern grant”.
• How the Tribunal approached the concept of a capable grantor in the context of charitable land.
• The implications of the decision for landowners, developers, and practitioners dealing with historic land use and rights of way.

This case highlights the evolving interpretation of prescription law and offers key insights into managing rights over land with charitable or ecclesiastical ownership.

Other cases mentioned:

• Hughes v Incumbent of the Benefice of Frampton-on-Severn and Others

Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:

Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email djb.events@djblaw.co.uk for information and booking.This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content.

Get in touch!

Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:

Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email djb.events@djblaw.co.uk for information and booking.

This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content.

Get in touch!