Robert Leonard

Call:1976

Introduction and Contact details

Robert’s practice covers a wide range of contractual and professional negligence claims. The contractual side includes agency, bailment, sale of goods, supply of services, exclusion and limitation of liability clauses, guarantees and indemnities, misrepresentation, quasi contract and restitution and conflict of laws. His commercial practice extends to claims in conversion and the economic torts. He is experienced in all forms of resolution, whether by litigation, arbitration or alternative dispute resolution.

Tel:    020 7242 2523 (switchboard)
Fax:   020 7691 1234

Email: robert.leonard@hardwicke.co.uk

Commercial

Arbitration

Robert’s experience lies in domestic arbitration, often in partnership disputes.

Recent cases

Dispute between solicitors following dissolution of partnership and encompassing numerous individual points of claim and defence.

Dispute between general practitioners following dissolution of partnership, including treatment of payments towards acquisition of assets in one partner’s name only.

Companies

Robert undertakes a broad range of corporate work including disputes arising from the sale of businesses or companies, disputes between those involved in the running of business through the medium of companies, quasi partnership and derivative claims and actions for breach of director’s duties.

Current or recent cases include

Claim by creditors of individual director that assets held in legal ownership of various property companies, and shares in those companies, are in reality in the beneficial ownership of the director.

Minority shareholding dispute based on quasi partnership between Asian businessmen who established a UK company for the creation of fast food outlets.

Minority shareholding dispute between members of the same family as to treatment by controlling shareholders of income and assets of property owning company.

Derivative claim brought by executors of deceased director when following his death fellow directors transferred assets of company to new company.

Claim against sequestrators for an account of their dealings with the income and assets of a company while in sequestration and in relation to their remuneration. Claim by company against those responsible for wrongfully obtaining ex parte without notice order sequestrating its assets.

Claim against liquidator of company arising from the loss of goods the subject of bailment on company premises on the basis that the liquidator knew or ought to have known that goods did not belong to company.

Cases

Tombstone v Raja (2009) 1 WLR 1143; (2008) NPC 142 ; [2008] EWCA Civ 1444 (whether judicial order should be set aside with the consequence that breach of duty in obtaining ex parte order without notice would deprive defendant solicitors and their client of ‘judicial act’ protection of order and expose them to a claim in trespass and conversion);

Partnership

Robert deals with a variety of partnership disputes. Examples are:

Asian businessmen in litigation as to assets of partnership running restaurant.

Arbitration between GPs as to assets acquired in one partner’s name.

Solicitors in dispute about a large variety of matters the subject of numerous points of claim and cross claim.

Professional Negligence

Robert’s broad and extensive experience includes:

Claims against solicitors and conveyancers in relation to property acquisition whether by purchase or lease, and the adequacy of security documents. Such claims include issues of whether sufficient pre-contract enquiries were made, whether adequate information was obtained or imparted to the client and whether the client was fully and properly advised.

Other claims against solicitors arising out of non-contentious work, including the drafting of documents and claims by disappointed beneficiaries in relation to Wills – whether adequate instructions were taken, whether the testator had capacity, whether the Will was properly attested, whether attestation should have been left to the testator and whether attestation errors should have been noticed.

Claims against solicitors and barristers arising out of contentious work, including advising on merits or quantum of claim or defence, advising as to the risks of litigation, and arising from the conduct of litigation whether in terms of limitation, procedural error or under or over settlement of claims.

Claims against receivers and mortgagees out of their management and sale of property subject to receivership or mortgage.

Current or recent cases include

Claim against conveyancing solicitors by purchaser of long lease - whether extent of potentially onerous obligations to local authority sufficiently pursued in pre-contract enquiries; whether client sufficiently advised and warned.

Claim on an account arising out of the manner in which a significant number of commercial and residential properties were managed during period of sequestration (on analogy of receiver/mortgagee duties).

Claim by guarantors of mortgagor against mortgagees for sale of a herd of cattle at an undervalue.

Claim against litigation solicitors representing other party to litigation and based on the wrongful obtaining of a without notice order resulting in loss of client’s property.

Claim against liquidator for unnecessary demolition of building and loss of contents.

Cases

Tombstone v Raja (2009) 1 WLR 1143; (2008) NPC 142 ; [2008] EWCA Civ 1444 (whether judicial order should be set aside with the consequence that breach of duty in obtaining ex parte order without notice would deprive defendant solicitors and their client of ‘judicial act’ protection of order);

Humblestone v Fahy [2004] EWHC 151 (Ch), [2004] PNLR 26, [2004] All ER (D) 67 (Feb), TLR 27th February 2004. Professional negligence claim against solicitors by disappointed beneficiary. Will not executed though purportedly witnessed. Scope of solicitors duty in taking in document for safekeeping. Whether deceased intended to execute document. Whether necessary to show that deceased authorised claimant to deposit document with solicitors. Whether necessary to show deceased s intention to benefit claimant continued until his death. What amounted to a change of intention. Whether the doctor/mountaineer analogy in SAAMCO enabled solicitors to avoid liability as Will not in any event properly attested.

Baldock v Webster [2005] EWCA Civ, Court of Appeal, [2006] 2 WLR 1, [2005] 3 All ER 655, TLR 13.1.05. Professional negligence claim against solicitors for failing to prosecute personal injury claim. Preliminary issue heard in QBD High Court, District Registry, by Recorder who thought he was sitting in County Court. Whether the decision was saved by the doctrine of "judge de facto"; whether it is necessary that the judge de facto be sitting in the court in which he is authorised to sit; or whether it is sufficient that he believes that he is authorised to sit in the court in which he is sitting.

Trade

Robert has extensive experience of contractual and connected disputes whether between companies, partnerships and individuals. He deals with matters of agency, bailment, sale of goods, supply of goods and services, conflict of laws, exclusion and limitation of liability clauses, misrepresentation, guarantees and indemnities, quasi contract and restitution; also the economic torts and claims in trespass and conversion.

He is also experienced in the interpretation of insurance policies and in matters of coverage. He has dealt with a number of claims against insurers on the policy, including claims defended on the grounds of non disclosure or that the event was not covered or that the premium was not paid; also claims where the issue is the quantum of loss or level or quantification of a business interruption claim.

Current or recent cases include

Claim against liquidator of company arising from the loss of goods the subject of bailment on company premises on the basis that the liquidator knew or ought to have known that goods did not belong to company.

Claim by mortgagee of company against liquidator for damage to the security held by mortgagee.

Claim by estate agent for commission on sale of flat in Mayfair with issue as to whether the agent had been instrumental in introducing the purchaser within the meaning of the contract of agency.

Insurance

Robert’s insurance practice includes his wide experience of insured personal injury claims where he has acted both for and against insurers. Full details are set out below and cover the full range of accidents and type of claim.

Robert is also experienced in the interpretation of insurance policies and in matters of coverage. He has dealt with a number of claims against insurers on the policy. These include claims defended on the grounds of non disclosure or that the event was not covered or that the premium was not paid; also claims where the issue is the quantum of loss or level or quantification of a business interruption claim. His practice covers public liability, property owners’ liability, life cover and critical illness insurance. He is also experienced in acting for and against BTE insurers and under conditional fee agreements covered by ATE insurance.

BTE & ATE

Robert has wide experience of acting for and against BTE insurers in relation to personal injury claims as summarised below. He also has experience of consumer contract claims arising out of household policies.

His personal injury practice has also involved him in a number of cases covered by ATE insurance.

Details appear under individual headings.

Employers’ Liability

Robert has extensive experience of employer’s liability claims over many years. He acts mainly, but not exclusively, for claimants and covers the full range of orthopaedic, neurological and psychiatric injuries/industrial diseases and the situations giving rise to claims, including accidents abroad, on the sports field and at sea. He is numerate and well equipped to deal with intricate questions of causation and quantification as well as disputes over medical and other technical evidence.

He is also very experienced in limitation and other procedural problems as well as in professional negligence actions arising out of the failed or delayed prosecution of personal injury actions.

Robert combines a sympathetic manner with a robust application of his talents to the factual and legal issues.

His experience extends to the interpretation of insurance policies, the implication of terms, matters of coverage and issues of avoidance through non disclosure, non payment of premiums or otherwise.

Current or recent cases include

Below knee amputation of young man caused by car driving into his moped. Issues of contributory negligence, causation and quantification.

Infection arising from a knee operation caused by stress at work and leading to likelihood of above knee amputation. Issues of causation and quantification.

Back injury at work leading to instability that caused a later fall that gave rise to more serious injuries and complex issues of causation as between pre-existing condition, back injury and later fall.

Court of Appeal cases include

Ellis v Environment Agency [2009] PIQR P5, [2009] LS Law Medical 70, [2008] EWCA Civ 1117. Court of Appeal. Causation. Whether/how to apply the ‘but for’ test where damage attributable to several causes, some pre-existing, some tortious and others not tortious. Successful response to appeal and pursuit of cross appeal.

Baldock v Webster [2006] 1 QB 315, [2006] 2 WLR 1, [2005] 3 All ER 655, [2005] EWCA Civ 1869. Court of Appeal. Capacity of judge determining quantum in professional negligence claim against solicitors for failing to prosecute personal injury action.

Roerig v Valiant Trawlers [2002] 1 Lloyds Rep 681, [2002] 1 WLR 2304, [2002] 1 All ER 961, [2002] PIQR Q98. Court of Appeal. Whether Dutch or English Law should govern assessment of damages from accident at sea in international waters. Whether s. 4 Fatal Accidents Act 1976 a question of substance or procedure. Interpretation of the Rule of Displacement under s. 12 Private International Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1995. Analysis of contractual matrix involving fishermen employed by Dutch company to work on English vessel on high seas.

Maguire v Molin [2002] TLR 12.8.02 LTL 25.7.02 Court of Appeal. Whether amendment to effect substantial increase in damages claimed should be allowed after trial on liability had commenced and where increase would have affected allocation.

See also at first instance

Weldon v GRE [2002], QBD LTL 22/1/2001 Action on life policy. Whether assignment of the policy a defence to claim by assured’s estate. Whether assured’s failure to pay premiums a defence when insurer had failed to collect payment through direct debit system. Whether insurer owed duty of care to assured and/or estate.

Marine

Robert’s extensive personal injury experience includes acting for both defendants and claimants in claims rising from accidents at sea or on board ships. He is familiar with the procedural and limitation issues that can arise and is experienced in conflict of laws.

Cases include

Roerig v Valiant Trawlers [2002] 1 Lloyds Rep 681, [2002] 1 WLR 2304, [2002] 1 All ER 961, [2002] PIQR Q98. Court of Appeal. Whether Dutch or English Law should govern assessment of damages from accident at sea in international waters. Whether s. 4 Fatal Accidents Act 1976 a question of substance or procedure. Interpretation of the Rule of Displacement under s. 12 Private International Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1995. Analysis of contractual matrix involving fishermen employed by Dutch company to work on English vessel on high seas.

Occupier’s Liability

Robert has extensive experience of occupier’s liability claims over many years. He acts mainly, but not exclusively, for claimants and covers the full range of orthopaedic, neurological and psychiatric injuries/industrial diseases and the situations giving rise to claims, including accidents abroad, on the sports field and at sea. He is numerate and well equipped to deal with intricate questions of causation and quantification as well as disputes over medical and other technical evidence.

He is also very experienced in limitation and other procedural problems as well as in professional negligence actions arising out of the failed or delayed prosecution of personal injury actions.

Robert combines a sympathetic manner with a robust application of his talents to the factual and legal issues.

His experience extends to the interpretation of insurance policies, the implication of terms, matters of coverage and issues of avoidance through non disclosure, non payment of premiums or otherwise.

Current or recent cases include

Below knee amputation of young man caused by car driving into his moped. Issues of contributory negligence, causation and quantification;

Infection arising from a knee operation caused by stress at work and leading to likelihood of above knee amputation. Issues of causation and quantification;

Back injury at work leading to instability that caused a later fall that gave rise to more serious injuries and complex issues of causation as between pre-existing condition, back injury and later fall.

Court of Appeal cases include

Ellis v Environment Agency [2009] PIQR P5, [2009] LS Law Medical 70, [2008] EWCA Civ 1117. Court of Appeal. Causation. Whether/how to apply the ‘but for’ test where damage attributable to several causes, some pre-existing, some tortious and others not tortious. Successful response to appeal and pursuit of cross appeal.

Baldock v Webster [2006] 1 QB 315, [2006] 2 WLR 1, [2005] 3 All ER 655, [2005] EWCA Civ 1869. Court of Appeal. Capacity of judge determining quantum in professional negligence claim against solicitors for failing to prosecute personal injury action.

Roerig v Valiant Trawlers [2002] 1 Lloyds Rep 681, [2002] 1 WLR 2304, [2002] 1 All ER 961, [2002] PIQR Q98. Court of Appeal. Whether Dutch or English Law should govern assessment of damages from accident at sea in international waters. Whether s. 4 Fatal Accidents Act 1976 a question of substance or procedure. Interpretation of the Rule of Displacement under s. 12 Private International Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1995. Analysis of contractual matrix involving fishermen employed by Dutch company to work on English vessel on high seas.

Maguire v Molin [2002] TLR 12.8.02 LTL 25.7.02 Court of Appeal. Whether amendment to effect substantial increase in damages claimed should be allowed after trial on liability had commenced and where increase would have affected allocation.

See also at first instance

Weldon v GRE [2002], QBD LTL 22/1/2001 Action on life policy. Whether assignment of the policy a defence to claim by assured’s estate. Whether assured’s failure to pay premiums a defence when insurer had failed to collect payment through direct debit system. Whether insurer owed duty of care to assured and/or estate.

Personal Injury

Robert has extensive experience of personal injury work over many years. He acts mainly, but not exclusively, for claimants and covers the full range of orthopaedic, neurological and psychiatric injuries/industrial diseases and the situations giving rise to claims, including employer’s and occupier’s liability, road traffic accidents, product liability, accidents abroad, on the sports field and at sea. He is numerate and well equipped to deal with intricate questions of causation and quantification as well as disputes over medical and other technical evidence.

He is also very experienced in limitation and other procedural problems as well as in professional negligence actions arising out of the failed or delayed prosecution of personal injury actions.

Robert combines a sympathetic manner with a robust application of his talents to the factual and legal issues.

His experience extends to the interpretation of insurance policies, the implication of terms, matters of coverage and issues of avoidance through non disclosure, non payment of premiums or otherwise.

Current or recent cases include

Below knee amputation of young man caused by car driving into his moped. Issues of contributory negligence, causation and quantification;

Infection arising from a knee operation caused by stress at work and leading to likelihood of above knee amputation. Issues of causation and quantification;

Back injury at work leading to instability that caused a later fall that gave rise to more serious injuries and complex issues of causation as between pre-existing condition, back injury and later fall.

Court of Appeal cases include

Ellis v Environment Agency [2009] PIQR P5, [2009] LS Law Medical 70, [2008] EWCA Civ 1117. Court of Appeal. Causation. Whether/how to apply the ‘but for’ test where damage attributable to several causes, some pre-existing, some tortious and others not tortious. Successful response to appeal and pursuit of cross appeal.

Adams v Ali [2006] 1 WLR 1330, [2006] EWCA Civ 91. Court of Appeal. Limitation. Discretion to disapply. Whether the restrictive interpretation of s. 33 Limitation Act 1980 in Walkley v Precision Forgings Ltd applied to a second action where the first action had been commenced outside the primary limitation period.

Baldock v Webster [2006] 1 QB 315, [2006] 2 WLR 1, [2005] 3 All ER 655, [2005] EWCA Civ 1869. Court of Appeal. Capacity of judge determining quantum in professional negligence claim against solicitors for failing to prosecute personal injury action.

Roerig v Valiant Trawlers [2002] 1 Lloyds Rep 681, [2002] 1 WLR 2304, [2002] 1 All ER 961, [2002] PIQR Q98. Court of Appeal. Whether Dutch or English Law should govern assessment of damages from accident at sea in international waters. Whether s. 4 Fatal Accidents Act 1976 a question of substance or procedure. Interpretation of the Rule of Displacement under s. 12 Private International Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1995. Analysis of contractual matrix involving fishermen employed by Dutch company to work on English vessel on high seas.

Maguire v Molin [2002] TLR 12.8.02 LTL 25.7.02 Court of Appeal. Whether amendment to effect substantial increase in damages claimed should be allowed after trial on liability had commenced and where increase would have affected allocation.

See also at first instance

Weldon v GRE [2002], QBD LTL 22/1/2001 Action on life policy. Whether assignment of the policy a defence to claim by assured’s estate. Whether assured’s failure to pay premiums a defence when insurer had failed to collect payment through direct debit system. Whether insurer owed duty of care to assured and/or estate.

Product Liability

Robert’s wide personal injury experience, summarised above, includes product liability, including accidents arising from defective motor vehicles.

Recent work includes potential claim against manufacturer of vehicle based on computer malfunction, the effect of which was to cut off the brakes while vehicle was still in motion.

Professional Indemnity

Robert’s broad and extensive experience includes:
Claims against solicitors and conveyancers in relation to property acquisition whether by purchase or lease, and the adequacy of security documents. Such claims include issues of whether sufficient pre-contract enquiries were made, whether adequate information was obtained or imparted to the client and whether the client was fully and properly advised.

Other claims against solicitors arising out of non-contentious work, including the drafting of documents and claims by disappointed beneficiaries in relation to Wills – whether adequate instructions were taken, whether the testator had capacity, whether the Will was properly attested, whether attestation should have been left to the testator and whether attestation errors should have been noticed.

Claims against solicitors and barristers arising out of contentious work, including advising on merits or quantum of claim or defence, advising as to the risks of litigation, and arising from the conduct of litigation whether in terms of limitation, procedural error or under or over settlement of claims.

Claims against receivers and mortgagees out of their management and sale of property subject to receivership or mortgage.

The interpretation of insurance policies, the implication of terms, matters of coverage and issues of avoidance through non disclosure, non payment of premiums or otherwise.

Current or recent cases include

Claim against conveyancing solicitors by purchaser of long lease - whether extent of potentially onerous obligations to local authority sufficiently pursued in pre-contract enquiries; whether client sufficiently advised and warned.

Claim on an account arising out of the manner in which a significant number of commercial and residential properties were managed during period of sequestration (on analogy of receiver/mortgagee duties).

Claim by guarantors of mortgagor against mortgagees for sale of a herd of cattle at an undervalue.

Claim against litigation solicitors representing other party to litigation and based on the wrongful obtaining of a without notice order resulting in loss of client’s property.

Claim against liquidator for unnecessary demolition of building and loss of contents.

Reported Cases

Tombstone v Raja (2009) 1 WLR 1143; (2008) NPC 142 ; [2008] EWCA Civ 1444 (whether judicial order should be set aside with the consequence that breach of duty in obtaining ex parte order without notice would deprive defendant solicitors and their client of ‘judicial act’ protection of order);

Humblestone v Fahy [2004] EWHC 151 (Ch), [2004] PNLR 26, [2004] All ER (D) 67 (Feb), TLR 27th February 2004. Professional negligence claim against solicitors by disappointed beneficiary. Will not executed though purportedly witnessed. Scope of solicitors duty in taking in document for safekeeping. Whether deceased intended to execute document. Whether necessary to show that deceased authorised claimant to deposit document with solicitors. Whether necessary to show deceased s intention to benefit claimant continued until his death. What amounted to a change of intention. Whether the doctor/mountaineer analogy in SAAMCO enabled solicitors to avoid liability as Will not in any event properly attested.

Baldock v Webster [2005] EWCA Civ, Court of Appeal, [2006] 2 WLR 1, [2005] 3 All ER 655, TLR 13.1.05. Professional negligence claim against solicitors for failing to prosecute personal injury claim. Preliminary issue heard in QBD High Court, District Registry, by Recorder who thought he was sitting in County Court. Whether the decision was saved by the doctrine of "judge de facto"; whether it is necessary that the judge de facto be sitting in the court in which he is authorised to sit; or whether it is sufficient that he believes that he is authorised to sit in the court in which he is sitting.

Public Liability

Robert’s wide personal injury experience, summarised above, includes public liability, especially in the context of employer’s or occupier’s liability.

He is also very experienced in limitation and other procedural problems as well as in professional negligence actions arising out of the failed or delayed prosecution of personal injury actions.

Robert combines a sympathetic manner with a robust application of his talents to the factual and legal issues.

His experience extends to the interpretation of insurance policies, the implication of terms, matters of coverage and issues of avoidance through non disclosure, non payment of premiums or otherwise.

Current or recent cases include

Below knee amputation of young man caused by car driving into his moped. Issues of contributory negligence, causation and quantification;

Infection arising from a knee operation caused by stress at work and leading to likelihood of above knee amputation. Issues of causation and quantification;

Back injury at work leading to instability that caused a later fall that gave rise to more serious injuries and complex issues of causation as between pre-existing condition, back injury and later fall.

Court of Appeal cases include

Ellis v Environment Agency [2009] PIQR P5, [2009] LS Law Medical 70, [2008] EWCA Civ 1117. Court of Appeal. Causation. Whether/how to apply the ‘but for’ test where damage attributable to several causes, some pre-existing, some tortious and others not tortious. Successful response to appeal and pursuit of cross appeal.

Adams v Ali [2006] 1 WLR 1330, [2006] EWCA Civ 91. Court of Appeal. Limitation. Discretion to disapply. Whether the restrictive interpretation of s. 33 Limitation Act 1980 in Walkley v Precision Forgings Ltd applied to a second action where the first action had been commenced outside the primary limitation period.

Baldock v Webster [2006] 1 QB 315, [2006] 2 WLR 1, [2005] 3 All ER 655, [2005] EWCA Civ 1869. Court of Appeal. Capacity of judge determining quantum in professional negligence claim against solicitors for failing to prosecute personal injury action.

Roerig v Valiant Trawlers [2002] 1 Lloyds Rep 681, [2002] 1 WLR 2304, [2002] 1 All ER 961, [2002] PIQR Q98. Court of Appeal. Whether Dutch or English Law should govern assessment of damages from accident at sea in international waters. Whether s. 4 Fatal Accidents Act 1976 a question of substance or procedure. Interpretation of the Rule of Displacement under s. 12 Private International Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1995. Analysis of contractual matrix involving fishermen employed by Dutch company to work on English vessel on high seas.

Maguire v Molin [2002] TLR 12.8.02 LTL 25.7.02 Court of Appeal. Whether amendment to effect substantial increase in damages claimed should be allowed after trial on liability had commenced and where increase would have affected allocation.

See also at first instance

Weldon v GRE [2002], QBD LTL 22/1/2001 Action on life policy. Whether assignment of the policy a defence to claim by assured’s estate. Whether assured’s failure to pay premiums a defence when insurer had failed to collect payment through direct debit system. Whether insurer owed duty of care to assured and/or estate.

Road Traffic

Robert’s wide personal injury experience, summarised above, includes claims arising from road traffic accidents.

Current cases include below knee amputation of young man caused by car driving into his moped. Issues of contributory negligence, causation and quantification.

Reported Cases

Adams v Ali [2006] 1 WLR 1330, [2006] EWCA Civ 91. Court of Appeal. Limitation. Discretion to disapply. Whether the restrictive interpretation of s. 33 Limitation Act 1980 in Walkley v Precision Forgings Ltd applied to a second action where the first action had been commenced outside the primary limitation period.

Property and Private Client

Robert’s practice covers the broad range of real property work as well as trusts of land and disputes involving succession, probate and inheritance. In addition he has considerable experience of ancillary relief following divorce and judicial separation.

Family – Breakdown and Finance

Robert handles all forms of financial relief and has extensive experience in conducting difficult hearings involving substantial assets and/or complex documentation, including questions of the identification of assets.

Recent Cases include

Protracted ancillary relief dispute involving a significant number of buy to let properties with issues of where the income was going, how the party paying the mortgage interest should be given credit for such payments and what allowance should be made in relation to pre-marital assets.

Ancillary relief dispute involving substantial disagreement about the significance of the equal division of capital assets that the parties had effected when separating some 6 years before divorce proceedings.

Inheritance and Probate

Robert has extensive experience over the full range of contentious probate issues, in particular disputes over the validity and construction of Wills and entitlement to probate/ letters of administration.

He also has considerable experience in claims by and against executors (including deceased executors) and applications under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1976. Also professional negligence claims by disappointed would-be beneficiaries arising from defects in the formalities of execution and attestation.

Robert is aware of the very strong feelings to which such disputes can give rise, particularly in conflicts between siblings, and combines a sympathetic manner with a readiness to deal robustly with the factual and legal detail.

Current or recent cases include

Claim and Counterclaim by executors under rival Wills, each seeking probate in solemn form with issues of lack of capacity, want of knowledge/approval and undue influence.

Construction and implementation of provisions of Will requiring beneficiary to account to executors in respect of breaches of trust while beneficiary acted under power of attorney for the deceased.

Claim by beneficiaries against estate of deceased executor in relation to misappropriation of testator’s estate involving tracing and issues of beneficial ownership of deceased’s executor’s assets.

Claim by executors against financial adviser of deceased alleging that he personally benefited from his position and influence.

Claim by beneficiary for the replacement of executor due to improper handling of estate’s assets and for an account of sums due to beneficiaries.

Land and Real Property

Robert has considerable experience across a wide variety of property litigation and advisory work including trusts of land (cohabitees and others), commercial and residential landlord and tenant, forfeiture and possession claims, service charge disputes, vendor purchaser disputes, matters of title, land registration, rights of way and other easements, boundary disputes, adverse possession, commercial and residential mortgage and mortgage repossession disputes, claims in trespass, injunctions and other equitable remedies.

He also deals with professional negligence claims against solicitors and valuers in property related work; against solicitors in the context of both litigation and conveyancing work, the latter including issues of whether adequate security was obtained for loans.

Current or recent cases include

Boundary dispute involving the analysis of fencing obligations through successive conveyances and application to situation on the ground.

Dispute over existence and extent of right of way and whether abandoned.

Claim against conveyancing solicitors by purchaser of long lease - extent of potentially onerous obligations to local authority not revealed by pre-contract enquiries.

Claim on an account arising out of the manner in which a significant number of commercial and residential properties were managed during period of sequestration (on analogy of receiver/mortgagee duties).

Litigation between two companies, each controlled by different sections of the same family, as to beneficial ownership and entitlement to rents and profits of a parcel of residential properties. Connected dispute based on minority shareholder oppression.

Mortgage repossession action lasting 10 days in which almost every conceivable issue raised by husband and wife mortgagors – fraud (monies not advanced, charge not executed), construction/validity of loan and charge documentation, agency (whether agent receiving advance was agent for the husband/whether husband had wife’s authority to grant agency) whether undue influence, whether wife’s interest affected, excessive interest rate (extortionate credit bargain under CCA 1974) economic duress, harsh and unconscionable bargain.

Claim against liquidator by mortgagee of property for breach of duty in damaging security over real property.

Cases

(1) Red River UK Ltd (2) Ismail Dogan v (1) Anal Sheikh (2) Rabia Sheikh [2010] EWHC 961 (Ch)

Raja v Tombstone and others [2007] EWHC 1743 (Ch) and on appeal:-

Tombstone v Raja and others [2008] NPC 142, [2008] EWCA Civ 1444. Court of Appeal. Whether judicial act a defence to action in trespass when ex parte without notice order imposing sequestration was obtained in breach of duty to court.

Humblestone v Fahy [2004] PNLR 26, [2004] All ER (D) 67 (Feb) [2004] EWHC Civ151 (failure to check that Will had been signed by testator)

Trusts

Robert’s practice falls essentially into three categories. First, claims for breach of trust/duty on the part of executors or administrators of the assets of a deceased person. Second, claims for breach of trust/fiduciary duty arising in the course of an agency or a commercial or similar relationship between the parties. Third, disputes involving constructive or resulting trusts, usually of land, and claims based on proprietary estoppel.

Current or recent cases include

Claim by beneficiaries against estate of deceased executor in relation to misappropriation of testator’s estate involving tracing and issues of beneficial ownership of deceased’s executor’s assets.

Claim by executors against financial adviser of deceased alleging that he personally benefited from his position and influence.

Claim by beneficiary for the replacement of executor due to improper handling of estate’s assets and for an account of sums due to beneficiaries.

Claim by company against sequestrators for an account of their dealings with the assets of the company while in sequestration (by analogy with receiver’s duties in equity).

Claim against liquidator of company for breach of his obligations in equity to mortgagee of company’s assets.

Trusts of Land

Robert regularly deals with disputes between co owners of property, cohabitees and others, as to the existence or quantum of their respective beneficial interests in real property.

Recent cases include

Various trust of land disputes between cohabiting couples following breakdown or where it is necessary for one co-owner or cohabite to assert an equitable interest or larger interest against secured or unsecured creditors or against a trustee in bankruptcy.

These include two entirely separate cases where an elderly party exercising her Right to Buy with the financial assistance of a relative executed a deed entitling her to live in the property for life, the relative thereafter taking the property absolutely. Issues of undue influence and fairness to the purchaser and other relatives given the need to treat the statutory discount as the purchaser’s capital contribution

Claim by widow, against creditors of the deceased, to establish a beneficial interest in the matrimonial home registered in the sole name of the deceased.