header-logo header-logo

21 November 2025 / Caroline Shea KC , Richard Miller
Issue: 8140 / Categories: Features , Property , Construction
printer mail-detail

Breach in haste, repent at leisure?

236037
Developers beware: cynical breach cases are on the rise, write Caroline Shea KC & Richard Miller
  • Alexander Devine Children’s Cancer Trust v Housing Solutions Ltd established that applications under s 84(1) of the Law of Property Act 1925 involve two stages: the jurisdictional stage (where the Upper Tribunal considers whether one of the grounds in subsections (a), (aa), (b), or (c) is satisfied); and the discretionary stage.
  • At the discretionary stage, the Supreme Court considered whether there had been ‘a cynical breach’ of the covenant which the applicant was seeking to have modified or discharged was highly relevant.
  • Subsequent case law suggests that the factor of cynical breach has assumed increasing importance.

The developer’s last obstacle to realising the value of their land—after having assembled a site, bought out competing interests and secured planning permission, often at great time and expense—can be restrictive covenants. There are plenty of commercial reasons why an eager developer may wish to start their project without going through

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll