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

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll