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

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Construction team bolstered by hire of senior consultant duo

Switalskis—four appointments

Switalskis—four appointments

Firm expands residential conveyancing team with quadruple appointment

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

Private client team welcomes senior associatein Worcester

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