Are you a landlord or a tenant? Think you’ve heard something about new laws to protect your money when held by an agent? If you want to know more, read on… New regulations mean that by 1 April 2019 all private rented residential property agents that handle client money in England will have to sign
Monthly Archives: March 2019
Government select committee considers beneficial ownership register
We blogged on 26 July 2018 about the government’s plans to publish a register of beneficial ownership of UK registered land. The government proposes that the register will be maintained by Companies House and will show the owners and controllers of overseas entities that own registered land in the UK. It will catch all registered
MIPIM at 30
MIPIM has celebrated its 30th Birthday. There are a hardy few who will tell you that they have attended every one. I can’t claim that, but I did first attend in 1996 and have witnessed its teenage excesses and more recent sobering into maturity. Back in 1996 the Palais was about half its current size.
Tenant’s Right to Manage – Time for Change?
The procedure for tenants to take control of the management of their buildings is on the radar for reform as the Law Commission launches a consultation which closes on 30 April. To find out more about that right to manage (the “RTM”) click here and to understand the areas under examination read on! Exercise of
Podcast: Can Brexit frustrate a lease?
London Real Estate Associate Ben Willis discusses the key practical points you need to know about Brexit and contractual termination and force majeure provisions following the High Court’s judgment in the closely watched case of Canary Wharf (BP4) T1 Limited and others v European Medicines Agency, which found that the European Medicines Agency remains bound
The end of the road for Right to Rent?
The High Court has held that right to rent checks cause discrimination on grounds of race and nationality and breach the Human Rights Act. In his judgment released today, Mr Justice Martin Spencer said that the scheme could not be justified as “the measures have a disproportionately discriminatory effect”. He concluded that the “nail in