header-logo header-logo

09 February 2012 / Siobhan Jones
Issue: 7500 / Categories: Features , Property
printer mail-detail

Make yourself at home?

Siobhan Jones recounts the rise (& fall) of the “protester squatter”

The issue of squatting has been constantly in the news during recent months, encountered in many contexts: the protest group setting up camp, the occupation of commercial premises such as warehouses for parties and raves, and, of course, the occupation of residential homes under the pretence of a false “tenancy agreement”. Much current debate centres on whether or not our existing laws and remedies are sufficient to protect property owners, and the anticipated effect of proposals to beef up criminal sanctions.

This article will focus on two recent decisions which highlight the issues arising in cases involving the “protester squatter” in the context of public property and private commercial premises. Issues concerning the recent reported instances of trespassers occupying residential premises are such to require an article of their own.

St Paul’s protestors

The decision in The Mayor, Commonality and Citizens of the City of London v Tammy Samede and Ors [2012] EWHC 34 (QB), [2012] All ER (D) 88 (Jan)

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