Philip’s practice covers all areas of property litigation including commercial and residential landlord and tenant matters and real property disputes. He has extensive experience of proceedings in the County Courts, the High Court and the Court of Appeal as well as regularly appearing in the Property Chamber of both the First Tier and Upper Tribunals. Philip also regularly represents clients at mediations and in arbitrations.
Philip’s recent cases have included the following areas:
- Residential landlord and tenant disputes, including enfranchisement, right to manage, service charges and possession proceedings
- Mortgage disputes ranging from straightforward possession claims to more complex cases involving fraud and undue influence and land registration issues
- Easements, restrictive covenants and boundary disputes
- Commercial landlord and tenant disputes including renewal proceedings under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, dilapidations claims and forfeiture proceedings
- Development agreements, including options, conditional agreements for sale and related planning and valuation issues
- Insolvency matters with a significant property element, including disclaimer, vesting orders and escheat.
- 2000 - 2003, St Catherine's College, Oxford - B.A. Jurisprudence (1st class)
- 2003 - 2004, St Catherine's College, Oxford - B.C.L.
- 2004 - 2005, Inns of Court School of Law, Bar Vocational Course (Very Competent)
- Called, Inner Temple 2005 - BVC Major Scholarship.
- Stanning v Baldwin  EWHC 1350 (Ch) - The Cpurt determined issues, namely the location of a boundary, the use of a right way and drainage rights, arising from a proposal to replace a property which adjoined a common with four houses.
- Solid Rock Investments (UK) Ltd v Reddy and others, Henry Carr J, Chancery Division, 12 October 2016
Philip represented the successful Respondent in an appeal concerning a claim to recover a deposit paid upon entering into a contract for sale of development property pursuant to s. 49 (2) of the Law of Property Act 1925.
- Loose v Lynn Shellfish Ltd & Ors, Supreme Court  2 W.L.R. 1126
This is an important case concerning the seaward extent of a private fishery. The Supreme Court considered the proper approach to the construction of a presumed grant established by virtue of prescription and the potential impact of a grant of a movable boundary and the law of accretion on the extent of fisheries and other proprietary rights in coastal waters. Philip (with Guy Featherstonhaugh Q.C. and Charles Harpum) represented the fisherman exercising the public right to fish.
- Christopher Moran Holdings Limited v Carrarra-Cagni  UKUT 152
The Upper Tribunal determined that the respondent tenant was liable to contribute through the service charge to the cost of repairing two conservatories attached to a penthouse flat. The landlord was obliged to repair the main structure of the building including additions thereto. Even if the conservatories were erected in breach of covenant when they were built at some point in the early 1970s the sub-tenants were now obliged to contribute to the reasonable cost of repairing them. Philip represented the successful appellant.
- Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Limited v Bristol Rovers (188) Limited  1 P. & C.R. 6 (High Court, Mrs Justice Proudman),  EWCA Civ 160 (Court of Appeal)
Philip (with Mark Wonnacott Q.C.) represented Sainsbury’s both at first instance and before the Court of Appeal. The case concerned a conditional agreement for the sale and purchase of Bristol Rovers’ football stadium, the Memorial Ground. Sainsbury’s successfully contended that they had validly terminated the agreement to buy the stadium for £30 million, the right to do so having arisen because conditions precedent to completion had not been satisfied by the relevant date.
- Page v Convoy Investments Ltd  EWCA Civ 1061 (Court of Appeal)
In this case Philip represented the owner of agricultural land who had the benefit of a right of way over a track along adjoining land. The dispute involved a significant number of issues including the true position of the boundary, whether or not the right of way conferred a right to obtain access at any point along the track and whether or not gates erected by the owner of the track amounted to substantial interference with the exercise of the right of way.
- Assethold Limited v Watts  L. & T.R. 15, Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber)
Philip represented the landlord, Assethold which had incurred legal fees in connection with a party wall dispute with the owner of a neighbouring building. It was held that those costs were properly part of the service charge since they were incurred in taking steps to preserve the building by preventing works to a party wall.
- Innerspaces Self Storage Ltd v Harding & Ors  EWCA Civ 46 (Court of Appeal)
Appeared for the Appellant tenant in a case concerning the proper construction of a service charge provision in a lease of commercial premises. The Court of Appeal considered that the proper construction of the clause depended on the circumstances existing at the date of the lease and not the date of a later assignment of the lease to the Appellant.
- Quadracolor Ltd v Crown Estate Commissioners  High Court, Chancery Division (Mr Jeremy Cousins Q.C)
Philip represented the Claimant in a case concerning the concept of escheat of a freehold interest to the Crown. The Claimant held an option, exercisable on payment of nominal consideration, over land owned by a company which had been dissolved. The court held that the land escheated to the Crown and that it was appropriate to grant a vesting order in favour of the Claimant pursuant to s. 181 of the Law of Property Act 1925.
- Money back guarantee? Costs recovery under long residential leases and costs orders in the First Tier Tribunal. Part1: New Law Journal. 2016, 166(7718), 13-15, Part 2 New Law Journal 2016, 166 (7719), 13
- Forfeiture revisited: Magnic, Safin and Freifeld The Conveyancer and Property Lawyer. 2016, 4, 317-326
- The final curtain? McDonald v McDonald, Landlord and Tenant and Human Rights; New Law Journal 164 (7621), 11-12
- Is talk cheap? After Daejan Investments Ltd v Benson can landlords buy themselves out of consulting with tenants under s.20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 and what should be the price of doing so? Conveyancer and Property Lawyer Conv. (2014) No.2 Pages 156-164
- The right to manage and appurtenant property: Gala Unity Ltd v Ariadne Road RTM Co Ltd, Conveyancer and Property Lawyer Conv. (2013) No.5 Pages 447-454
- Putting on the breaks; the effect of the decision in Marks & Spencer Plc v BNP Paribas Securities Services Trust Co (Jersey) Ltd, New Law Journal N.L.J. (2013) Vol.163 No.7571 Pages 15-17
- Commercial and Residential Service Charges, Butterworths, 2013; Co-author
- Woodfall: Landlord and Tenant Bulletin, Contributing Editor.