Property case law update: February 2012

07 Feb 2012

Brumwell v Powys CC

Citation: Brumwell v Powys CC – 21.12.11 – CA – [2011] EWCA 1613

Keywords: Caravan Park – Operational agreement plus contract of employment and service occupancy – Alleged sham agreements amount to tenancy – Application of ’54 Act.

Held: There was no evidence or basis for concluding the transactions intended and the parties were not reflected by the documentation they elected to use. The notion of occupation as employee or agent is inconsistent with the notice of exclusive possession required for a tenancy.

Taylor v Lambert & Lambert

Citation: Taylor v Lambert & Lambert – 18.1.12 – CoA – [2011] EWCA Civ 3

Keywords: Boundary dispute – Construction of conveyance.

Held: Conveyance including words of description, plan for purpose of identification only and area of land sold expressed. Contention that the measurement of the area conveyed pro-dominate over the words and plan was rejected.

Cook v The Mortgate Business &  Mortgage Express

Citation: Cook v the Mortgage Business plc & Mortgage Express – 24.1.12 – CA – [2011] EWCA Civ 17

Keywords: Equity release scheme – Contract for sale – On completion lease back – Purchase funded by mortgage – Mortgage arrears – Purchasers absence – Vendor/tenants resisting possession claims.

Held: Where a vendor sold to a purchaser funding by way of mortgage and by a separate, albeit simultaneous, transaction was granted a tenancy the mortgagee’s entitlement took priority over the vendor’s tenancy or equitable rights.

A-G v Singer & Singer

Citation: A-G v Singer & Singer – 24.1.12 – DC (not yet on Bailii – see Lawtel)

Keywords: Vexatious applications in LVT, county courts and magistrates’ courts against management company of block of flats – Application for civil proceedings order.

Held: For the purpose of s42 of the Senior Courts Act 1981 the LVT is a court.


This content is provided free of charge for information purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied on as such. No responsibility for the accuracy and/or correctness of the information and commentary set out in the article, or for any consequences of relying on it, is assumed or accepted by any member of Chambers or by Chambers as a whole.


Please note that we do not give legal advice on individual cases which may relate to this content other than by way of formal instruction of a member of Gatehouse Chambers. However, if you have any other queries about this content please contact: