header-logo header-logo

NLJ this week: Quarterly review of landmark property cases

18 April 2025
Issue: 8113 / Categories: Legal News , Property , Landlord&tenant , Housing
printer mail-detail
216133
Recent caselaw in property come under the careful scrutiny of Fern Schofield and Gwyneth Everson, Falcon Chambers, in this week’s NLJ, in a new series of quarterly reviews.

Schofield and Everson cover landmark cases from December 2024, including the Supreme Court’s important clarification that the doctrine of merger does not apply to declaratory judgments and a separate case on the timeframe for adverse possession.

Other caselaw covers a range of topics from service of documents, in a decision ‘likely to become a go-to authority in first instance possession claims’, to the meaning of ‘building’. 

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The dangers of uncritical artificial intelligence (AI) use in legal practice are no longer hypothetical. In this week's NLJ, Dr Charanjit Singh of Holborn Chambers examines cases where lawyers relied on ‘hallucinated’ citations — entirely fictitious authorities generated by AI tools
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
back-to-top-scroll