Misrepresentation in Property Sales: Key Lessons for Buyers and Sellers from Patarkatsishvili v Woodward-Fisher

A recent case involving the sale of a £32.5m mansion in the highly sought after Notting Hill area highlights the seriousness of misrepresentation in property transactions.

The buyers who purchased the property in 2019 soon discovered a moth infestation – something which had not been disclosed to them prior to the sale. Following unsuccessful attempts to resolve the issue, it came to light that a local pest control company had treated the property for moths in 2018 on behalf of the seller, Woodward-Fisher. Reports were commissioned which identified the source of the problem as an infestation within the property’s insulation.

This was not disclosed to the buyers during the sale and the seller did not mention the moth infestation despite three direct enquiries.

The buyers subsequently brought a legal claim against the seller for fraudulent misrepresentation, seeking rescission of the contract and damages.

Read on to learn the outcome of the case and discover key lessons from our conveyancing solicitor.

The Case

The court found that the seller had given false and misleading responses to three specific enquiries:

whether the property had ever been affected by infestation or defects;
whether there were any relevant reports;
and whether the seller was aware of any hidden defects.

In each instance, the court ruled that the seller’s replies were misleading. In reality, the property had suffered from a serious moth infestation, and the seller had received expert reports in 2018 identifying the issue and recommending remedial measures.

The court concluded that this amounted to misrepresentation and the seller had a clear duty to disclose both the infestation and the related reports.

As a result, the buyers were entitled to rescind the contract – effectively reversing the sale – and recover the £32.5 million purchase price, along with additional losses, including stamp duty and the cost of remedial works.

Solicitor’s Insights

Full disclosure of material information

Full transparency is expected – sellers should disclose any known issues to enable buyers to make informed decisions and carry out effective due diligence.

Buyer beware is not a shield

The judgment provides reassurance in property transactions as it shows the courts are prepared to unwind transactions where there is misrepresentation. Buyers are entitled to rely on the information provided by the seller – and may seek rescission where misrepresentation is proven.

Law Unchanged, but Lessons Reinforced

Importantly, the judge described this as an “extreme” example of misrepresentation, and each case will turn on its specific facts.

Caveat emptor isn’t going anywhere

The fundamental principle of caveat emptor (buyer beware) remains in property transactions. It is not clear whether the Claimants conducted their own survey and if they did whether the case will turn on this point. Buyers are still strongly advised to commission thorough surveys and investigations prior to purchase to ensure they understand the condition of the property.

Enforcement can be costly – most won’t go that far

While this case reinforces established legal principles, it also highlights a practical reality: taking legal action can be prohibitively expensive. It’s important to recognise that this was an exceptional case, where the scale of the loss made court proceedings worthwhile. In most situations, buyers may not have the financial means or justification to pursue similar claims. As such, thorough due diligence remains essential to minimise risk and avoid disputes down the line.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call our office on 020 7928 0276, we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Or, use the contact form on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/contact/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

James Cook

See Full Bio

Understanding the Differences in Handling Sexual Offence Cases: UK vs China

In recent months, we have taken on a growing number of sexual offence cases involving Chinese students in the UK. These cases often highlight a crucial issue: a misunderstanding of the UK criminal justice system due to differences in legal culture and procedure between China and the UK.

In China, it is not uncommon for defendants in sexual offence cases to seek private resolutions outside the courtroom. This may involve negotiating a settlement with the complainant or obtaining a letter of forgiveness from the complainant. In many instances, such steps can mitigate the severity of sentencing and are often seen as an important part of the legal strategy.

However, the situation in the UK is fundamentally different—especially in criminal cases involving sexual allegations.

No Contact with the Complainant

Once someone is charged with a sexual offence in the UK and granted bail, a key condition is that the defendant must not contact the complainant, either directly or indirectly. This is strictly enforced.

Attempts to communicate with the complainant—whether through friends, family members, or third parties—can lead to serious consequences:

Breach of Bail Conditions
Violating the terms of bail can result in immediate arrest and the revocation of bail.
Perverting the Course of Justice
Trying to influence or interfere with the complainant’s position can be considered a criminal offence in itself, potentially resulting in additional charges and a harsher sentence.

Cultural Differences Lead to Legal Risks

Many Chinese students are unaware of these legal boundaries and may instinctively turn to familiar cultural practices to resolve the matter, such as asking the complainant for forgiveness or attempting a private settlement. While these intentions may be well-meaning, they can severely backfire under UK law.

Legal Advice Is Critical

If you or someone you know is facing a sexual offence allegation in the UK, it is vital to seek legal advice as early as possible. Understanding your rights—and more importantly, your restrictions—can make a significant difference in the outcome of your case.

Our team has experience working with international students and understands the cultural and linguistic barriers involved. We provide clear guidance to help you navigate the UK criminal justice system with confidence and caution.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call our office on 020 7928 0276, we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Or, use the contact form on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/contact/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

James Cook

See Full Bio

A General Guide to Financial Remedy Applications

About 85-90% of family financial remedy cases settle before a contested final hearing. While the case Cemke v Cemke [2025] EWFC 180 is simply applying established law to the facts, it is one of the few recent family financial remedy cases that proceeded to final hearing.

The case might be useful for general readers to understand the court’s typical approach to financial remedy applications. While there may be a perception of bias among some people, the courts apply the same legal principles to both spouses, regardless of their roles during the marriage.

How do the courts consider financial remedy applications?

When the courts consider financial remedy applications, their objective is to achieve an outcome that is “as fair as possible in all the circumstances.”

When evaluating fairness, the court is required to look at the matters listed in section 25 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, giving first consideration to any child of the family.

Section 25A of the MCA 1973 strongly encourages a clean break between the parties. This means that the courts prefer lump sum settlements rather than periodical payments, except where this would lead to an unfair result.

In financial remedy applications, the three essential principles are compensation, sharing and needs. Compensation is rarely applied, so it will not be discussed further in this article.

Regarding the sharing principle, the parties are ordinarily entitled to an equal division of the marital assets. Non-marital assets are usually retained by the party to whom they belong, unless there is a good reason to decide otherwise. In practice, needs will generally be the only justification for a spouse to claim non-marital assets.

Differentiating between marital and non-marital assets

The court recognises that differentiating between marital and non-marital assets is not always easy. It depends on the circumstances and the specific facts of the case. Usually, non-marital wealth has one or more of three origins:

Property brought into the marriage by one party;
Property generated by one party after separation; and/or
Inheritances or gifts received by one party.

The difficulty lies in determining whether, when, and to what extent non-marital assets turn into marital assets, which need to be divided under the sharing principle. The courts might consider when the property was acquired, how it has been used, whether it has been mingled with the family finances, and what the parties intended.

The needs principle

While the sharing principle is a useful tool to achieve fairness, the needs principle will prevail if it warrants a greater award. In other words, if the required sum to satisfy one party’s needs is greater than the sum calculated under the sharing principle, the court will award the former—unless it is unfair to do so.

Needs are a flexible concept. The principle of need requires consideration of:

The financial needs, obligations and responsibilities of the parties;
The standard of living enjoyed by the family before the breakdown of the marriage;
The age of the parties;
Any physical or mental disability of the parties;
The payer’s wealth;
The length of the marriage;
The source of wealth (marital or non-marital), among other factors.

In appropriate cases—typically long marriages and subject to financial resources available—courts have taken the view that needs should be set “at a level as close as possible to the lifestyle (i.e., standard of living) which they enjoyed during the marriage.”

The case also delved into the topic of delay—the lapse between the separation and the financial remedy application.

Although an application can be made at any time after the divorce has been finalised, an unjustified delay may be a factor (potentially a highly material one) when weighing the section 25 criteria.

Final thoughts

The above outlines the general approach to financial remedy applications. Before concluding, it is crucial to consider the importance of evidence and cross-examination, especially in situations where facts are in dispute.

Understandably, couples may not find it necessary to store evidence when the relationship is solid. However, often, a single piece of evidence can sway the judgment one way or the other. It may therefore be prudent to keep records of any financial transactions to protect your interests.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call our office on 020 7928 0276, we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Or, use the contact form on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/contact/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

James Cook

See Full Bio

Facing an OPSS Investigation? Legal Steps to Protect Your Business

The Office for Product Safety and Standards is the United Kingdom’s national regulator for consumer product safety. Its role has expanded steadily since its establishment in 2018, and it now plays a central part in monitoring, investigating and enforcing compliance with product-related regulation across the UK market. For businesses involved in manufacturing, importing, or retailing, contact with the OPSS is not uncommon. When it happens, the right legal guidance can make a decisive difference in managing the process and protecting your position, especially if you are subject to an OPSS investigation.

Who does the OPSS regulate?

The OPSS has jurisdiction over virtually every actor in the consumer goods supply chain. This includes manufacturers, distributors, retailers, online platforms, and importers. While local Trading Standards departments remain active in frontline enforcement, the OPSS takes the lead where cases involve national interest, cross border dimensions, emerging product risks or broader policy considerations.

Of particular importance in the present day is the fact that online marketplace sellers who sell via platforms such as Amazon, eBay and Etsy may be treated as importers or distributors and held responsible for compliance even if they do not manufacture or import directly.

While local Trading Standards authorities retain frontline responsibility for most consumer goods enforcement, the OPSS acts as the national oversight body. It may take the lead where matters are complex, cross-border, involve emerging risks, or raise policy significance.

The Legal Framework

The OPSS enforces a range of product safety and compliance regulations, including:

The General Product Safety Regulations 2005
Electrical Equipment Safety Regulations 2016
Toys Safety Regulations 2011
Personal Protective Equipment Regulations 2018
UKCA marking and conformity assessment requirements
Energy labelling and eco-design rules for relevant product categories
Environmental and resource efficiency rules for manufactured goods

Our team can advise on whether your product is within scope and what duties apply to you in law.

How the OPSS Operates

An investigation by the OPSS often begins quietly. It may start with a simple request for information or a test purchase carried out under assumed identity. These initial steps are designed to assess whether a product complies with legal requirements. If concerns arise, the regulator can escalate its intervention swiftly and without further notice.

Businesses may be asked to provide full compliance documentation, technical files, labelling information or correspondence with suppliers. Where the matter is more serious, the OPSS may request that directors or senior staff attend an interview under caution, which is a formal process with potential criminal consequences. In some cases, the regulator will issue a suspension notice or order that a product be withdrawn from the market entirely. Civil financial penalties may follow, and in more serious or persistent breaches, criminal prosecution is a real possibility.

The OPSS also works in cooperation with other agencies, including Trading Standards, Border Force and international regulatory authorities. The scope of an investigation can therefore expand quickly and may involve reputational, commercial and cross border implications.

What to Do If You Are Under Investigation

If you or your business receives correspondence or a visit from the OPSS, it is important to respond promptly and carefully. Key steps include:

Engage legal advice early – Investigations may carry both reputational and legal risk. Early advice can shape the response strategy and avoid unnecessary admissions.
Preserve and review documentation – Ensure relevant compliance documentation, internal assessments, and supplier certifications are collated and reviewed.
Prepare for interview – Where interviews under caution are proposed, legal representation should always be present. These are formal interviews with potential criminal implications.
Consider proactive remedies – In some cases, offering voluntary corrective action or additional testing may assist in mitigating enforcement action.
Maintain clear lines of communication – A cooperative but carefully managed dialogue with the regulator is in the business’s best interest.

How We Can Help

Regulatory investigations move quickly. So must your response. We support clients at every stage of engagement with the Office for Product Safety and Standards, providing clear, strategic advice from the outset.

We help assess the scope and seriousness of the investigation, advise on your legal obligations, and manage communications with the regulator. We assist in preparing and reviewing documentary responses, including technical files, testing records and internal correspondence. Where interviews under caution are proposed, we ensure you are fully advised and represented, both in advance and during the interview itself.

It must be said that no two investigations are the same. If you are under investigation or have received contact from the OPSS, contact our team and we will provide tailored advice based on the specific facts of your case and the regulator’s approach.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call our office on 020 7928 0276, we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Or, use the contact form on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/contact/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

James Cook

See Full Bio

How to Prevent a Forged Will? Unclaimed Estates List Removed as Gangs Target Bona Vacantia

As the UK becomes an aging society, the issue of inheritance after the death of elderly people grows as a a high profile issue. People who are close to them often have no idea whether the elderly person has left a will, let alone whether they have other living relatives.

This has led to a phenomenon where there is a lot of “unclaimed property” (Bona Vacantia) in the UK. As a result, some people have set their sights on these inheritances. The government even recently removed its unclaimed estates list after a rise in reported cases of fraud within the probate system.

What is “Bona Vacantia” and why is it a target for scammers?

Bona Vacantia is a Latin term meaning “vacant goods”. In law, it refers to the estate left by an individual who dies intestate in England and Wales without legal heirs.

According to the law, these estates will pass to the Crown. Until recently, relevant information about these estates was regularly published on the official gov.uk website as the unclaimed Estates list. There were roughly 6,000 such estates listed on the list, which included basic information such as the name of the deceased, date of birth and death, and place of death.

The government’s original intention in publishing this list was to help lawyers and “family search companies” provide clues so that they can find possible legal heirs and help them claim their relatives’ inheritance.

However, leaving this detailed list open to the outside world has been regarded as a “gold mine” by criminals.

How did a gang of fraudsters ‘inherit’ an elderly woman’s million-pound estate?

In late 2023, an elderly woman without children passed away in Wimbledon, South London.

Christine Harverson lived independently following the death of her husband in 2020, had a small social circle, and did not leave a will. However, her nieces, Lisa and Nicole, were due to inherit her entire estate. Her name soon appeared on the Bona Vacantia list. A few weeks later, a man claiming to be her “dear friend” suddenly contacted the government agency responsible for handling her estate and submitted a “newly discovered will.”

The “will” was dated 2016 when Christine was housebound and disabled, and claimed that she left all her property to the man – including a detached house worth about nearly £1m.

There were a few signs that something wasn’t right about the validity of the Will. However, there are many suspicious points about this so-called “legal heir”. For example:

His name, Tamas Szvercsok, is a typical Hungarian spelling, and Christine’s neighbour and friend, Sue, said that she had never mentioned a Hungarian friend.
The will would have disinherited Christine’s husband and carer at the time
Christine could not have legally bequeathed the house without her husband’s consent as he was a joint owner
There was no record of Mr Szvercsok visiting Christine in the care home
Christine’s home address was misspelled
The address for Mr Szvercsok did not exist until 2021

According to the investigation, this person is suspected to belong to an organized international fraud gang that forged a large number of wills and illegally inherited the property of the deceased by establishing shell companies and fabricating identities.

What recommendations does our Solicitor make?

Solicitor Xinlei Zhang of Lisa’s Law makes the following recommendations:

When elderly or seriously ill people make a will, it is recommended that a doctor issues a medical certificate stating that they have the capacity to make a will and to keep records of the entire process.

Be sure to use a written and recorded paper will and find a specialized lawyer to help you complete the will.
Signatures are important in a will: if there are multiple versions or an illegible signature, its validity may be questioned.
As for witnesses, the safest approach is to ask a lawyer or firm employee to be a witness and avoid the involvement of relatives.

There are many ways to prevent a will from being forged or tampered with

1. Make multiple copies to keep a record of the signing process

In addition to the original, scanned copies or photocopies may be retained
The signing process can be recorded on video, especially in families with a high risk of dispute
Have a lawyer or professional organization issue a “proof of signature” document

2. Keep your will safe

Do not leave your will in a drawer or in a place where it can be stolen
Recommended storage methods: deposited in the will-making law firm; deposited in a bank safe deposit box; deposited in a government-recognized will registration system (such as the National Will Register)

3. Avoid “manual modification” with irregular modification methods

It is not recommended to arbitrarily cross out, add to, or alter the original will
If you want to make changes, you should use a “supplementary will” (Codicil), which also requires signatures and witnesses
If the will has been revised multiple times, you should consider making a complete new will and declaring the old will invalid

4. Preventing a forged will from taking effect

If someone submits a “new will” that conflicts with their original will, the court will determine its authenticity based on the evidence
Including whether the signatures are consistent
Whether there were witnesses on the day of signing
Whether the source of the document is credible
The testator’s mental state
Whether there is a conflict of interest

Final thoughts

Since the introduction of the current digitised probate system in 2017, it has become easier than ever to create a will. In order to ensure the legality, authenticity, tamper-proof and legal validity of the will, Lisa’s Law recommends that you consult relevant professionals before establishing a will. We also recommend that you only write the will after receiving professional advice. If you have any related questions, please feel free to consult our Family Department at any time.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call our office on 020 7928 0276, we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Or, use the contact form on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/contact/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

James Cook

See Full Bio

Handling Title Defects: When Is Indemnity Insurance the Right Call?

When buying a property, most people don’t expect to be faced with ancient covenants, missing deeds, or rights of way that no one knew about. But these issues – known as title defects – are more common than you might think. As conveyancing solicitors, one of our key roles is to uncover them and decide how best to manage the risk. Sometimes the answer is straightforward. Other times, we have to reach into the legal toolbox and pull out something called indemnity insurance.

So what exactly is title indemnity insurance, and when should it be used? Let’s break it down.

What is a Title Defect?

A title defect is any legal issue with the ownership or use of a property that could affect the buyer’s rights. This might include:

A missing right of way (e.g. the property has no legal right to access the main road);
A restrictive covenant (a rule in an old deed that says, for example, you can’t build an extension);
A breach of a covenant by a previous owner;
Lack of planning or building regulation approvals for old works;
Unregistered easements (such as informal access paths);
Lost or missing deeds (especially in unregistered land).

These defects can make a buyer or lender nervous. If left unresolved, they might affect the property’s value, future saleability, or even result in legal action.

What is Title Indemnity Insurance?

Title indemnity insurance is a one-off insurance policy taken out to cover the risk of a defect causing loss. It does not fix the defect. Instead, it offers financial protection in case the issue ever causes a real-world problem.

For example, if there’s a restrictive covenant that says you can’t extend the property, but an extension has already been built, an indemnity policy could cover the cost of defending any future legal claim.

Policies are usually inexpensive (often under a few hundred pounds), last indefinitely, and are transferable to future buyers and lenders.

When Should Indemnity Insurance Be Used?

Not every title issue needs indemnity insurance. Sometimes, it’s better to resolve the issue directly (for example, by getting a deed of variation or applying to register a right of way). However, there are situations where indemnity insurance is the practical, commercial solution:

1. The Defect is Historical and the Risk is Remote
  For example, a breach of covenant from 40 years ago that has never been enforced.
2. The Seller Cannot Remedy the Defect
  If a right of way was never properly granted and the neighbouring landowner refuses to cooperate.
3. Lenders Require Protection
  Mortgage lenders often insist on indemnity cover for missing consents or rights.
4. Time or Cost Constraints
  Insurance can avoid lengthy negotiations or tribunal applications.

Limitations and Cautions

Indemnity insurance isn’t a silver bullet. It comes with conditions – and if you breach them, the policy may become void. For example, most policies will be invalidated if you approach a third party (like a neighbour or the council) to ask about the defect.

Also, indemnity policies do not cover:

Loss of value due to general stigma;
Physical repair costs (e.g. fixing structural problems);
Future planning applications that might uncover the defect.

That’s why it’s important to understand what you’re getting – and not getting – with the policy.

Final Thoughts

Title defects can sound intimidating, but they’re not always deal-breakers. With our team of experienced conveyancers at Lisa’s Law and proper risk management, they can often be dealt with swiftly and safely. Indemnity insurance is indeed often very useful in a conveyancer’s kit – but it should be used wisely and only where appropriate.

If you’re buying a property and your solicitor mentions a “title defect,” don’t panic. Ask for a clear explanation of the risk, whether insurance is suitable, and what it will (and won’t) protect you against.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call our office on 020 7928 0276, we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Or, use the contact form on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/contact/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

James Cook

See Full Bio

Lisa’s Law Helps Company Achieve New Sponsor Licence Following Ownership Change

We were recently instructed by a company that previously held a skilled worker sponsor licence. The company underwent a change in majority shareholding and changed its name. However, the company did not report the change in shareholders or apply for a new sponsor licence within the required 20 working days.

Instead, they only reported the name change to the Home Office several months later. The change of name was rejected, as a new licence was required due to the change in controlling ownership. The company instructed us to apply for a new sponsorship to continue sponsoring the previously sponsored employee.

Our involvement (how we helped)

We advised the company that they must obtain a new Skilled Worker sponsor licence due to the change in majority ownership. We prepared and submitted a priority sponsor licence application for the new company, including representations requesting the Home Office exercise discretion regarding the late notification. Following this, we obtained the company’s documents to demonstrate continuity of operations, including share transfer documentation, proof of name change, and employee continuity.

For the employee, we understand that this type of company change falls under TUPE (Transfer of Undertakings – Protection of Employment), and the employee does not need to apply for a new work visa. We explained the TUPE in our representations, clarifying that the employee’s sponsorship should continue without the need for a new visa application.

After the new licence was successfully granted, we helped the company to submit a change of circumstances request to surrender their old licence, and formally accept sponsorship responsibility for the skilled worker.

Outcome

The new sponsorship licence was granted within 10 working days. The old sponsorship licence was made dormant, then the skilled worker was transferred to the new licence, without the need to apply for a new skilled worker visa.

Need help with a sponsor licence application? Contact Lisa’s Law today.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call our office on 020 7928 0276, we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Or, use the contact form on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/contact/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

James Cook

See Full Bio

Landowners Begin High Court Legal Challenge to Leasehold Reform

A group of landowners have begun a judicial review in the high court over the introduction of the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act. The legislation, which was passed by MPs at the end of the last parliament, is designed to expand the rights of leaseholders. You can find out more about the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act (LAFRA) in our previous explainer here. Let’s take a look at what the landowners are challenging and the implications of this legal action for leasehold reform.

Judicial review in the High Court

The judicial review, which aims to prevent many of the reforms in LAFRA from taking place, has been initiated by a number of wealthy landowners, including the Duke of Westminster’s Grosvenor Estate under the Cadogan and Grosvenor Group. Between them, the six groups challenging the reforms own the freehold interest in more than 390,000 leasehold flats and houses across England and Wales, less than 9% of the total number of leasehold properties.

The challenge has been brought under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), with the freeholders claiming that some of the measures contained in the Act are contrary to their right to enjoy private property.

The hearing in the Divisional Court began on Tuesday 15^th July and is set to conclude by Friday 18^th July. Subscribe to our newsletter for further updates.

What measures of the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act are being challenged?

There are three aspects of the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act which are being challenged by the freeholders. This includes:

The removal of the requirement for leaseholders who possess leases under 80 years to pay 50% of the marriage value to the freeholder.
The removal of the requirements for the leaseholder to pay the freeholder’s costs when extending the lease
The exclusion of ground rents worth more than 0.1% of the freehold vacant possession value from being included when calculating the price which is payable for the extension.

It is claimed by the landowners that they could lose hundreds of millions of pounds as a collective due to the advent of the reforms, and that they will not be fairly compensated by the advent of the above measures.

What happens next?

Unfortunately for leaseholders, the legal challenges mean an indefinite delay to the implementation of many aspects of the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act. The potential for appeals by either side following the conclusion of the High Court case, regardless of the outcome, could result in the reforms becoming mired in legal battles for the next few years. Although the government committed to replace leasehold with a “fairer model” in their manifesto, the reality of this happening currently looks a long way off.

Nevertheless, the Housing Minister Matthew Pennycook reiterated the government’s commitment to bringing the leasehold system to an end by the conclusion of this parliament (2029). But what does the government plan to replace leasehold with? To learn more, read our article all about the government’s plans for a new commonhold model here.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call our office on 020 7928 0276, we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Or, use the contact form on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/contact/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

James Cook

See Full Bio

Care Provider Refused Judicial Review Application Due To Sponsor Licence Revocation

In late June 2025, the Administrative Court refused a care provider’s renewed application for judicial review following its skilled worker sponsor licence revocation by the Home Office. The central issue was whether the Secretary of State acted lawfully in revoking the licence based on insufficient evidence to prove that the roles sponsored were genuine.

Background

On 20 March 2024, the Home Office suspended HE Reigns Healthcare Services Ltd’s sponsor licence, citing serious concerns that the organisation posed a threat to immigration control. Specifically, the Secretary of State expressed that the provider had assigned, or intended to assign, Certificates of Sponsorship (CoS) at a scale disproportionate to its business profile and that the sponsored roles were not genuine vacancies.

The provider was invited to submit evidence to verify the legitimacy of the sponsored roles, including staff lists, justification for recruitment levels, and evidence that sponsored workers were carrying out the duties listed in their CoS. The response from the provider disputed the allegations and highlighted a newly secured contract to justify its recruitment needs, though the precise scope and sufficiency of the evidence submitted remained unclear.

On 12 June 2024, the licence was formally revoked. The Secretary of State noted, among other issues, that 50 of the 124 sponsored workers could not be identified on payroll records, and that the volume of contracted work did not support the level of recruitment.

Judicial Review Claim

HE Reigns brought a judicial review claim, asserting procedural unfairness and contesting the conclusions drawn by the Home Office. Key arguments included:

The revocation process lacked transparency and fairness;
The evidence showed sufficient work to justify the sponsored roles;
A finding of deliberate dishonesty was required for revocation;
Inadequate consideration was given to contracts and the workers’ actual status;
The 20MB limit for uploading evidence was unreasonable;
There was insufficient engagement with their representations.

The Secretary of State responded that:

There were reasonable grounds to suspect non-genuine vacancies, which justified revocation;
The evidence submitted was inadequate;
There is no requirement to prove dishonesty to revoke a licence;
Their approach to the evidence and procedural limits complied with public law standards.

The Court’s Decision

The Court ruled against HE Reigns Healthcare. It found:

The Secretary of State is not required to prove deceit or dishonesty to revoke a licence where non-genuine vacancies are suspected;
The claim that 50 workers were unaccounted for was supported by the evidence, given the lack of payroll records or explanation;
There was no obligation on the Secretary of State to conduct interviews or go beyond the representations made by the provider;
No public law error occurred in the handling of the case or the format in which evidence was accepted.

The Court ultimately refused permission for the claim to proceed.

Conclusion

While this case does not create new law, it serves as a critical reminder of the stringent compliance obligations placed on sponsor licence holders. From a UK immigration perspective, the case reinforces the importance of proactive and detailed record-keeping, particularly in demonstrating the genuineness of sponsored roles and ensuring complete and coherent responses to Home Office enquiries.

Employers should not wait for enforcement action to review their systems. Our team continues to assist sponsors in navigating their duties under the current immigration framework, especially in light of the upcoming rule changes to the Skilled Worker route from 22 July 2025.

If you are concerned about the strength of your compliance framework or have received correspondence from the Home Office, we recommend seeking legal advice at the earliest opportunity. Contact Lisa’s Law today to find out how we can help you.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call our office on 020 7928 0276, we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Or, use the contact form on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/contact/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

James Cook

See Full Bio

Prior Settlement Barred Landlord’s Forfeiture Procedure in Court of Appeal Decision

Generally, settlement agreements are designed to resolve disputes and prevent further legal actions, including forfeiture, unless explicitly stated otherwise. If the landlord initiated forfeiture proceedings despite the existence of a prior settlement agreement that addresses the same issues, they may have acted inconsistently with the terms or intentions of that agreement.

In this appeal case, the court reaffirmed that settlement agreements should be interpreted according to their plain language and legal context.

Background

This case involves a dispute over whether the Landlord Company could seek forfeiture of the Tenant’s lease of a flat, or whether a settlement agreement from December 2021 prevented such action. The Tenant occupied the flat under a lease from 1980 for a duration of 999 years. The lease includes covenants to keep the premises in repair and provisions for re-entry if breached. In 2020-2021, water leaks from the Tenant’s flat caused damage to the flat below. Investigations identified issues with the shower area, including faulty grouting and possible structural cracks.

The Landlord Company issued notices demanding repairs, but delays occurred. Notably, the Leasehold Reform Act 2002 and the 1938 Act restricts the ability of landlords to serve notices or pursue forfeiture for breaches related to repairs, especially if breaches are disputed or settled. After the Landlord Company filed three applications in the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) alleging breach of repairing covenants, the parties reached settlement in December 2021 which included the Tenant admitting breach, paying £75,000, and covenants not to sue or pursue claims related to the dispute.

Legal Issue

The core issue on appeal is whether the Landlord Company was barred from seeking forfeiture due to the settlement agreement, or whether the agreement effectively prevented it from continuing proceedings. The appeal also concerns the costs awarded.

The Court found that the agreement released the Tenant from claims related to the proceedings and prohibited either party from suing the other regarding the same. However, there is debate over whether this release includes or excludes forfeiture proceedings.

The lower court’s decision was that the settlement did not prevent forfeiture proceedings, but the Judge granted the Tenant relief on costs.

The Tenant appeals, primarily challenging the costs order, with the legal question cantered on whether the settlement agreement barred the Landlord Company from seeking forfeiture and related proceedings.

Decision

The Judge emphasised that the Tenant’s admission of breach under clause 4 of the settlement agreement was crucial in favour of the Landlord. However, the analysis of section 168 revealed that its primary purpose is to determine whether a breach has occurred, serving as a step towards potential forfeiture but not constituting a forfeiture itself. The case highlighted that remedies like injunctions or damages remain available alongside or instead of forfeiture, and that a breach determination under section 168(4) does not automatically lead to forfeiture, especially if the breach has been remedied or if the right to forfeit has been waived.

The Court also clarified that in this case, the benefits gained from the section 168 application—such as additional obligations and deadlines—were significant and cannot be dismissed as insubstantial. Furthermore, the parties’ legal context suggested that forfeiture was unlikely due to protections under the Leasehold Property (Repairs) Act 1938, which makes forfeiture of long leases challenging.

The dispute centred on whether the breach of clauses 3(1) and 5.3 of the lease or the settlement agreement justified forfeiture. The Court concluded that the agreement reshaped the parties’ rights, discharging claims related to lease breaches and limiting future claims to breaches of the agreement itself. Consequently, the Landlord was not entitled to forfeit the lease based on breaches of clauses not incorporated into the lease obligations. The Tenant succeeded in contesting the cost for forfeiture claim by the Landlord.

Our thoughts

This case is a demonstration and reminder on the principle of settlement agreement, and it is crucial for disputed parties to clarify key provisions and to comply with them, when such an agreement is reached.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, phone calls are operating as usual and we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Or, use the contact form on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/contact/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

James Cook

See Full Bio

Have a question? Our friendly and experienced team are here to help.

Subscribe to our newsletter

We post weekly articles covering a variety of topics, including immigration, property, and more, so subscribe to our newsletter for the latest updates.