header-logo header-logo

03 June 2020
Issue: 7889 / Categories: Legal News , Procedure & practice , Property
printer mail-detail

NLJ this week: Stay on housing possession cases

PD 51Z: managing court capacity & protecting public health

The stay on housing possession cases, brought in by Practice Direction (PD) 51Z, could continue beyond the current 25 June cut-off point or even lead to long-term change, barristers have predicted.

PD 51Z came into force on 27 March and was intended to last 90 days, with the purpose of managing court capacity and protecting public health. In NLJ this week, Julian Gun Cuninghame, Gough Square, and Romana Canneti, 4 King’s Bench Walk, write: ‘138,000 possession claims are brought every year in the county courts: their possession lists go on all day, with large numbers of people awaiting their five-minute hearings milling unhygienically around the court buildings.’

Therefore, ‘given the current capacity of the county courts to handle possession lists, and the risks to public health of possession orders, PD 51Z may well be extended… additional exceptions may also be in the offing.

‘Furthermore, the active risk of a second spike in COVID-19 cases, either this autumn, or at some other time—not to mention the possibility of future national emergencies—suggests that PD 51Z may bring permanent changes to the Civil Procedure Rules, whether by rule change or a new PD.’

Lobbying of the Master of the Rolls by the Property Bar Association and the Property Litigation Association preceded an amendment to PD 51Z on 17 April 2020 (effective from 20 April 2020). It created three exceptions to the stay: two relating to squatters, and one allowing applications for case management directions which have been agreed by all the parties.

The barristers highlight recent cases from the Court of Appeal and point out that, when the stay is finally lifted, ‘the courts will be dealing with a huge backlog of possession claims, and roofs will have to be put over the heads of the newly dispossessed, not least to protect them from the risks of a second spike’. 

Issue: 7889 / Categories: Legal News , Procedure & practice , Property
printer mail-details
RELATED ARTICLES

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
Digital loot may feel like property, but civil law is not always convinced. In NLJ this week, Paul Schwartfeger of 36 Stone and Nadia Latti of CMS examine fraud involving platform-controlled digital assets, from ‘account takeover and asset stripping’ to ‘value laundering’
Lasting powers of attorney (LPAs) are not ‘set and forget’ documents. In this week's NLJ, Ann Stanyer of Wedlake Bell urges practitioners to review LPAs every five years and after major life changes
back-to-top-scroll