Archive for the ‘Articles’ Category

SCMP article: Undue Influence

October 28, 2013

The SCMP has just published my article Law guards against coercion when making contracts

The Pallant v Morgan equity: article and podcast

October 19, 2012

My article, ‘The Pallant v Morgan equity” has just been published ([2012] Conveyancer and Property Lawyer 379). It explains the nature of the equity and the contexts in which it is frequently invoked. The article considers the debate as to the nature of the equity and the need to balance commercial certainty, on the one hand, with the need to give effect to agreements that were intended to be taken seriously, on the other.

Steven Gallagher and I have started a Property Law Podcast series on the CUHK iTunes U site. I have done a brief podcast about the Pallant v Morgan equity for this series.

Article on Kerr v Baranow in Conveyancer and Property Lawyer

December 20, 2011

My commentary on the decision of the Canadian Supreme Court in Kerr v Baranow has just appeared (‘The constructive trust: from common intention to relationship? Kerr v Baranow’, [2011] Conveyancer and Property Lawyer 515 – 521). The judgment in Kerr looks at the use of unjust enrichment as a way of allocating rights in the assets of a ‘joint family venture’. The nature of the relationship between the co-habitees and the role of that relationship in improving the family’s balance sheet are central elements of the analysis. The article contrasts this approach with the use of the common intention constructive trust in England. It asks whether, despite the differences in approach between the two jurisdictions, there is evidence of convergence? After Stack, can it be said that the nature of the relationship between the parties (especially in its financial aspects) plays an important role in reaching a conclusion as to the ‘common intention’?

Article on Bruton in King’s Law Journal

December 14, 2011

My article ‘Bruton v London & Quadrant Housing Trust: Opening Pandora’s Box’ has just appeared in King’s Law Journal ((2011) 22(3) King’s Law Journal 403 – 413) – click here to go to the Journal’s web-page). The article considers the possible legal bases for the House of Lords decision in this case. Lord Neuberger has recently stated that relativity of title supplies the explanation (Mexfield Housing Co-operative Ltd v Berrisford [2011] UKSC 52, para. 65). London & Quadrant’s possession could be seen as giving them a relative title out of which to carve a lease. Similarly, Mr. Bruton’s own possession could be seen as conferring relative title. This explanation would allow the outcome to be compatible with the traditional idea that the lease is always an estate in land. I argue, however, that Lord Hoffman was careful to reject the idea that Mr. Bruton had any title at all (relative or otherwise).

The Bruton Tenancy

February 18, 2010

My article “The Bruton tenancy” has just appeared – (2010) 1 Conveyancer and Property Lawyer 38 – 56.

The judgments in the Court of Appeal and in the House of Lords are fascinating and discuss fundamental issues concerning the nature of the lease. Can there be a purely contractual lease? This is a lease that is not an estate in land.

There has been a good deal of commentary on the decisions and this article draws on this literature and, of course, seeks to add to it in a useful way.

Bruton v London and Quadrant Housing Trust

February 2, 2010

This podcast discusses the House of Lords decision in Bruton v London and Quadrant Housing Trust. Click here for the podcast.