header-logo header-logo

18 April 2019 / Sally Anne Blackmore
Issue: 7837 / Categories: Features , Property , Brexit , Landlord&tenant , EU
printer mail-detail

Brexit frustration takes centre stage

Sally Anne Blackmore considers Canary Wharf v EMA: would Brexit frustrate a lease granted to the EMA?

  • Tests for frustration.
  • UK domestic and EU Law: different approaches.
  • Capacity.
  • Should the court have made a preliminary reference?

This case concerned whether Brexit would frustrate a lease granted to the European Medicines Agency (EMA). On 20 February 2019, Mr Justice Marcus Smith held that it would not and that the EMA remains obliged to perform its obligations under the lease (see Canary Wharf (BP4) T1 Ltd and other companies v European Medicines Agency [2019 ] EWHC 335 (Ch), All ER (D) 154 (Feb)).

Three companiesCanary Wharfwere responsible for constructing and managing a building at 25–30 Churchill Place, Canary Wharf (the property). The EMAan institution of the EU, established by Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (the 2004 Regulation), with its capacity wholly prescribed by Regulations and Decisions and its seat in London pursuant to one such Decisionwanted

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