+44 (0)20 7353 2484 clerks@falcon-chambers.com

Stephen Jourdan QC

Called 1989Silk 2009

Stephen Jourdan QC

Stephen has a wide-ranging practice covering all aspects of property litigation, including insolvency, professional negligence and partnership disputes. He has considerable experience of leading in heavy cases turning on valuation issues or difficult questions of law.

Joint Head of Falcon Chambers

  • Education
    • Trinity College, Cambridge (1981-4): Entrance and Senior Scholar; MA (Cantab.) in law (1st)
  • Professional
    • Deputy High Court Judge
    • Recorder (Civil)
    • Judge of the Property Chamber of the First Tier Tribunal (formerly Deputy Adjudicator to HM Land Registry)
    • Joined Falcon Chambers (then 11 King's Bench Walk) in 1990
    • 1985 - 1989: Solicitor at Theodore Goddard, working in property litigation and commercial property
  • Recent Cases
    • York House (Chelsea) Ltd v Thompson [2019] EWHC 2203 (Ch) (High Court). Leases granted by a husband and wife to a wife for no premium at a peppercorn rent were disposals by way of gift to a member of the landlord’s family, and also a transfer by two or more persons who are members of the same family to fewer of their number, and so excluded disposals under s.4(2) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987. Certain parts of the building were not “common parts”.
    • Windsor-Clive v Rees [2019] 4 WLR 74 (High Court). A right for  landlords to enter at “all reasonable times for all reasonable purposes” did not entitle them to dig boreholes or trial pits but did entitle them to leave remote bat detectors on the land as a form of extended inspection. No injunction should be granted absent a strong probability of infringement.
    • Morris and Perry (Gurney Slade Quarries) Ltd v Hawkins [2019] 6 WLUK 202 (County Court). A reservation of minerals with “right of entry and all necessary ancillary rights in connection with winning and working the same” entitled the owner of the minerals to plant trees on the surface and let them grow to provide a screen, if that was reasonably necessary to obtain planning permission to extract the minerals.  
    • Aldford House Freehold Ltd v Grosvenor [2019] 1 WLR 1489 (High Court). A separate set of premises were a “flat” even though not yet fitted out internally. A Bahamas company had authorised the signature of a notice, as had one BVI company with Jersey corporate directors, but another BVI company with Panamanian corporate directors had not authorised the signature of the notice. 
    • Bannerman Town etc. Association v Eleuthera Properties [2018] UKPC 27 (Privy Council). A developer did not have good documentary title to 2,000 acres of land, nor had it acquired title by adverse possession by erecting signs and clearing the boundaries.
    • Office Depot International v UBS Asset Management [2018] EWHC 1494 (TCC) (High Court). It was not open to the tenant to seek a declaration against its landlord as to what work was needed to comply with its covenant to repair the roof of a warehouse.
    • Crown Estate Commissioners v Whitehall Court London [2019] 1 WLR 2319 (Court of Appeal).  The “no-Act rights” assumption in Sch 13 para 3 applies to the building and not just the flat. The headlease required all money received by the headlessee from underlessees to be shared with the freeholder, even if the transaction was not permitted under the headlease.
    • Mundy v Sloane Stanley [2018] 1 WLR 4751 (Court of Appeal). Sales of leases of flats with 1993 Act rights may be taken into account in determining the value of a lease of a flat without Act rights. Therefore the tenant’s challenge to the Upper Tribunal’s decision to reject the Parthenia model of relativity failed. 
    • Starham v Greene King (2 November 2017, unreported) Central London Chancery List. A right to use land granted in 1855 was neither an easement nor a restrictive covenant but a licence, and therefore did not bind a successor in title to the grantor. 
    • Persimmon v Ashfield Provincial Properties (10 October 2017, unreported) High Court. It would be wrong to grant summary judgment declaring that a development agreement remained in effect when documents might be disclosed as to the factual background relevant to the interpretation of the agreement. There were also factual issues relating to causation and whether time had been made of the essence which could not be determined summarily.
    • Kingsbridge Pension Fund Trust v Downs [2017] L&TR 31 (Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber)). On a s.50 Agricultural Holdings Act 1986 succession application, the livelihood condition only needs to be satisfied for the 7 years up to the date of the retirement notice, and not also the 7 years up to the hearing.
    • Artist Court Collective Ltd v Khan [2017] Ch 53 (High Court). A disposal by a trustee to a beneficiary was not a “relevant disposal” under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987.
    • McDonald v McDonald [2017] AC 273 (Supreme Court). The Human Rights Act 1998 does not provide a defence to a claim to possession by a private landlord under an assured shorthold tenancy.
    • Gladman Developments v Sutton [2016] EWHC 1597 (Ch) (High Court) No oral agreement had been entered into for the promotion of land for development.
    • Sloane Stanley v Mundy [2016] L&TR 32 (Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber)). An analysis of pre-1993 sales using hedonic regression was not a reliable method for ascertaining the relative value of leases in the present market.
    • Ham v Bell [2016] EWHC 1791 (Ch) (High Court). A farm was not an asset of a family farming partnership, despite having been treated in the accounts as such.
    • Dickinson v UK Acorn Finance [2016] HLR 17 (Court of Appeal). It was an abuse of process for mortgagors to seek to rely on the unenforceability of a secured loan under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 s.26 two years after a possession order had been granted.
    • Jewelcraft Ltd v Pressland [2016] 1 P & CR 9 (Court of Appeal). A purpose-built shop with a flat over was a “house” for the purposes of the Leasehold Reform Act 1967.
    • Royal Mail Estates v Maples Teesdale [2015] EWHC 1890 (Ch) (High Court). S.36C(1) of the Companies Act 1985 makes a person who signs a contract in the name of a company not yet formed liable on the contract, even if the contract says that it is personal to the company. Under appeal to the Court of Appeal.
    • Safin (Fursecroft) v Badrig [2015] EWCA Civ 739 (Court of Appeal). The power of the Court to extend time in consent orders where the parties had agreed that time was of the essence.
    • Woodhouse v Besent [2015] 3WY00170 (HHJ Hughes QC, Winchester CC). The landlord of a large dairy farm was not estopped from denying that there were succession rights.
    • Thomas v Albutt [2015] EWHC 2187 (Ch) (High Court). Negligence claim against a barrister who acted in a planning judicial review claim.

     

  • Publications
    • Consultant Editor for the title "Boundaries" in vol 4 of Halsbury's Laws 5th ed (2011)
    • "Adverse Possession" 2nd ed. (2011)
  • Awards
    • Winner of the ERMA Barrister of the Year Award 2013
    • Nominated for the Chambers Real Estate Silk of the Year Award 2012.
Stephen has "excellent litigation instinct" says peers who note they have "great respect for Stephen" and command his impressive work on valuation issues. Who's Who Legal UK Bar 2019 Guide
"Has an extremely wide property and agricultural law practice and also handles property-related insolvency, partnership and professional negligence claims. He is also lauded for his deep knowledge of landlord and tenant matters. 'He knows everything, is very creative and has a terrifying command of the details.' 'He delivers excellent written work and is an extremely tenacious advocate.' 'His eye for detail is second to none.' 'Excellent, incisive and very user-friendly.' Recent work: Acted successfully for the claimant in a case concerning the interpretation and effect of a right to use land granted in 1855." Chambers UK Guide 2019 (Real Estate Litigation)
"Well-known agricultural law specialist who receives outstanding feedback from peers. He regularly represents family farming partnerships and their individual members, and also routinely handles landlord and tenant disputes. His recent experience primarily involves acting for rural clients in the context of arbitrations. Strengths: 'He's an advocate who garners a lot of respect from the court, and his submissions are all the more weighty as a result. He is particularly good because his knowledge goes beyond just pure property. He is also quite practical - he rolls up his sleeves and gets on with the job.' Recent work: Acted in Knightsbridge Pension Fund Trust v Downs, an agricultural holdings succession dispute which turned on a point of law as to whether the livelihood condition in Section 50(2)(a) of the Agricultural Holdings Act 1986 was satisfied." Chambers UK Guide 2019 (Agriculture & Rural Affairs)
"A massively clever senior counsel who is at the forefront of the property litigation Bar."Legal 500 2018 (Property Litigation)
"Exceptionally able and knowledgeable, approachable and user friendly."Legal 500 2018 (Agriculture)
"Stephen Jourdan QC draws praise for his property litigation practice. One client is particularly effusive: 'He is incredibly precise, clearly has a grip on all the detail and lets you know you are in incredibly safe hands'."Who's Who Legal 2017
Nominated for the Chambers Real Estate Silk of the Year Award 2012.
Winner of the ERMA Barrister of the Year Award 2013.
More published comments

A Member of:

Falcon Chambers Arbitration