Legal wrap: Things that go bump in the night, squatters’ rights and Hillside

Welcome to your weekly round-up of the pick of the content published on EG Legal. This week, we feature comment on Hillside Parks – the much-anticipated planning decision from the Supreme Court. We also take a look at the Scottish Law Commission’s proposals for tenancy reform, in addition to tackling a question on whether a landowner can obtain an injunction where persons unknown threaten to protest on their land. Other highlights include analysis of a Court of Appeal decision on collateral warranties and a Legal Note dealing with an Upper Tribunal decision on contracts. Legal news £2.5m Fitzrovia apartment owners lose lawsuit over noisy facade The owners had argued that mysterious bangs and pops ruined their enjoyment of the property Christian Candy fails in bid to recover almost £2m in stamp duty The case relates to his purchase of a £20m Georgian villa now inhabited by his brother Nick Cripps head of residential estates to retire Kerry Glanville specialises in property litigation Legal features Back to Basics: Squatters’ rights Jessica Parry goes back to the drawing board on adverse possession Legal notes: An unfortunate exchange In an exchange of contracts for sale of property, each signed part must be delivered to the other party A positive outcome for beneficiaries of collateral warranties A Court of Appeal decision concludes that collateral warranties can constitute construction contracts Legal Q&A: Taking preventive action Laura Bushaway and Joel Semakula look at whether a landowner can obtain an injunction where persons unknown threaten to protest on their land The view from Hillside What does the Supreme Court say on planning permission in this much-anticipated decision? Making sense of tacit relocation Steven Blane and Brian Grierson take a look at the effect of tacit relocation and the Scottish Law Commission’s new proposals for reform Pets in the workplace: paws for thought? What are the practicalities of allowing dogs in the workplace and is it paws-ible?  Practice points A notice to quit addressed to a person by name must correctly identify the recipient OG Thomas Amaethyddiaeth Cyf and another v Turner and others Drop-in planning permissions and multi-unit developments Hillside Parks Ltd v Snowdonia National Park Authority Developer cannot implement planning permission if compliance is physically impossible Hillside Parks Ltd v Snowdonia National Park Authority Statutory nuisance: no distinction between intended use and antisocial use Merren Jones and others v Chapel-en-le-Frith Council Service charges: reasonableness and payability of management fees Howe Properties (NE) Ltd v Accent Housing Ltd Recoverability of the costs of serving a section 166 notice Stampfer v Avon Ground Rents Ltd Case summaries Tejani v Fitzroy Place Residential Ltd and another Nuisance – Noise – Breach of covenant Hillside Parks Ltd v Snowdonia National Park Authority Town and country planning – Planning permission – Pilkington principle Candy v Commissioners of HM Revenue and Customs Taxation – Stamp duty land tax – Repayment OG Thomas Amaethyddiaeth Cyf v Turner and others Landlord and tenant – Notice to quit – Validity Law report Pile v Pile Landlord and tenant – Joint tenancy – Notice to quit For more legal articles and to search our extensive archive, visit EG Legal