Jeff Hardman

Thandi v Saggu [2023] EWHC 1379 (Ch) (08 June 2023)
High Court, Business & Property Court
Deputy Master Teverson

This dispute related to an impugned agreement requiring the Claimant to sell a mixed-use property to the Defendant. As the Claimant refused to sell the Property, the Defendant secured a Unilateral Notice against the registered title protecting his alleged beneficial interest. The Claimant issued proceedings seeking various forms of relief relating to the Unilateral Notice.

Jeff represented the Defendant who wished to uphold the agreement and enforce the sale of the property. The was heard before a Deputy High Court Judge in October 2023, with Jeff securing a partial success. The decision can be found here:  Thandi v Saggu (Trial) (2023).

Prior to trial, the Claimant issued an ambitious application for summary judgment, based upon arguments not found within the pleadings. Jeff was instructed to oppose it and succeeded in securing the dismissal of the summary judgment application. A copy of the Judgment can be found here.

Burton Waters Moorings Limited v Connell & Ors (2023)
High Court, Business & Property Court in Birmingham
Chancery Appeals
Mr Justice Zacaroli

Jeff successfully represented the Claimant in a three-day action before HHJ Coe KC, with the Defendant represented by leading counsel. The Defendants’ application for permission to appeal was dismissed on the papers before they applied for an oral renewal hearing which was heard by Mr Justice Zararoli. Jeff was instructed to appear on behalf of the Claimant, with his submissions being described as ‘forceful’ and ‘persuasive’. Despite this, the Defendants’ application was described as not fanciful, with prospects of success, and has been listed for a two-day appeal. Ordinarily, the Respondent’s costs for attending an application for permission to appeal are not recoverable. However, the court ordered that the respondent’s costs be ‘costs in the appeal’ as Mr Justice Zacaroli considered that Jeff’s written and oral submissions assisted the court to distil the issues even if, on this occasion, permission to appeal had been granted.

Irving v High Net Worth Lending (2023)
County Court at Central London
HHJ Johns KC

This dispute involves two brothers and a lender. The sum of £520,000 was secured against the property by one brother, the legal owner. The other brother, who Jeff represents, has sought declaratory relief that he is the sole beneficial owner and was in actual occupation within the meaning of the Land Registration Act 2002, Schedule 3, Para.2. If correct, this would mean that the lender has not secured any monies against his beneficial interest. Listed for a 4-day trial, which settled with a favourable outcome for the client.

Abdel-Mahmoud v Clive Court (Maida Vale) Freehold Limited Clive Court (2022)
First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) (Residential Property)
(2-day trial)

Clive Court is an enormous residential mansion block in Maida Vale, London W9 and consists of three interconnected blocks spread over 8 floors containing 154 flats. The Applicant challenged service charges across multiple years, the gross value running into millions. Jeff successfully represented the Respondent, dismissing every challenge save for one modest item relating to legal costs. A copy of the judgment is found [here].

Pinto v London Borough of Haringey (2022)
First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) (Land Registration)
(2-day trial)

This was an adverse possession dispute referred to the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) by H.M. Land Registry. It concerned the ownership of a section of a rear garden. The Applicants claimed to be entitled to it as a result of over 10 years’ adverse possession since 2004. This was vigorously opposed by the London Borough of Haringey. Jeff successfully represented the Applicant at trial, with the FTT determining that the disputed land had been acquired by adverse possession. A copy of the judgment also found [here].

Imran v Mahmood (2022)
County Court at Central London (Business & Property List)
HHJ Parfitt

The Claimant secured a money judgment against the Defendant and then obtained an order for sale of the family home. The Claimant’s solicitors had conduct of the sale but sold the property at a significant undervalue to a Third Party, alleged by the Defendant to be holding himself out as the owner of law firm responsible for the sale.

Jeff Hardman represented the Defendant and obtained an urgent injunction preventing the sale of the property at an auction. The order was obtained 30 minutes before the property was due to be sold. It should be noted that prior to Jeff’s involvement, the Defendant had instructed different counsel who made a similar application to the High Court but was dismissed. Jeff ran a different argument, alleging that the Claimant had breached his duties as a seller. As the Third Party was aware of the breach, this tainted the transaction which entitled the Defendant to injunctive relief.

Thereafter, Jeff successfully opposed the legal arguments advanced by the Third Party and obtained a determination that the property had been sold at a significant undervalue. A copy of the judgment can be found [here].

Burton Waters v Boyd & Ors (2022)
County Court at Lincoln
HHJ Coe KC
(3-day trial)

The Claimant sought to recover unpaid mooring licence fees from leaseholders of residential properties on the luxury Burton Waters estate. The Defendants retained a silk and argued that certain terms of the mooring licence were unfair pursuant to the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999, such that the licence was altogether unenforceable. As there are over 300 license holders, the value of an enforceable contract to the claimant was in excess of £20,000,000.

Jeff was instructed by Schillings and was successful at trial; the Judge upheld his arguments and the Defendants’ challenges were dismissed. A copy of the judgment also found [here]. A link to press coverage can be found here [here].

Fernie v Burton Waters Management Limited & Beal Development Limited (2021)
First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)
(5-day trial)

The Applicant applied for a determination of the liability to pay, and reasonableness of, service charges (in excess of £700,000) for the years 2015, 2016, 2017 & 2018. The FTT produced a 173-page decision following a 5-day trial. The entire claim was dismissed save for a handful of matters that resulted in a rebate of approx. £10. Jeff successfully represented the Defendants. A copy of the judgment can be found [here].

Moreover, the Defendant applied for the Applicant (and his father separately) pay the Defendants’ costs due to their unreasonable conduct pursuant to rule 13 of of the Tribunal (Procedure First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rules. This is a high threshold to meet and an exceptional order. In this case, the FTT ordered C (and his father, his representative) to pay the Defendants’ costs on an indemnity basis, with £90,000 to be paid on account. The Defendants’ costs are estimated to be £140,000.

Wahid v Azmahomed (2021)
County Court at Central London
HHJ Hellman
(5-day trial)

The Claimant issued a claim against his landlord for damages arising out of building works to convert the upper parts of the building into three self-contained apartments. The Claimant occupied the ground floor chicken shop and contended that the works caused multiple leaks and noise nuisance. The second part of the claim arose from the removal of the shop’s flue by the Defendant. Jeff represented the Claimant, who was partially successful and obtained an order for costs from the Defendant.  A copy of the judgment can be found [here].

Dhadwal v Heathrow Inn Limited [2021] 12 WLUK 211
High Court, Appeal List
Mr Justice Roth

The tenant carried out works to refurbish the existing hotel restaurant, turning the restaurant’s outside smoking area into a shisha lounge. The landlord issued forfeiture proceedings contending that the shisha lounge was said to constitute a breach of the user covenant in the lease. The judge dismissed the claim on the basis that the shisha lounge was simply another activity available to hotel residents and used the analogy of a cigar lounge, and the landlord appealed.

Jeff Hardman represented the landlord at both hearings. He obtained permission to appeal and received generous compliments from the judge for his submissions. The Court held that the meaning of “hotel” in the lease had to be considered in the context of the circumstances at the time the lease was granted (in 2014) and on the evidence available. The case may have wider significance as it is the only High Court authority on the relationship between a hotel and shisha restaurant as regards the interpretation of a common user clause found in a commercial lease. A summary of the decision can be found [here].

Doble v Doherty & Persons Unknown [2020] High Court (QBD)
Mr Justice Fordham

The Claimant obtained an ex parte injunction against a group of travellers who had violently seized the Claimant’s land through intimidation and violence, including the use of firearms and explosions of caravans with gas canisters. At the return hearing, which was opposed by the Respondents, Jeff successfully obtained a final injunction against the travellers and a possession order.

De Mata v James Cargo Limited (2020)
County Court at Central London
HHJ Parfitt
(3-day trial)

The Claimant, being the intermediate tenant of a commercial property, claimed the sum of £87,28.80 being unpaid rent owed by the sub-tenant. By way of response, the Defendant asserted that the lease was validly determined due to the failure by the Claimant to make the building fit for use and occupation following damage caused by a criminal break-in. The Defendant counterclaimed for the sum of £100,000. The case involved a legal argument on the correct interpretation of the lease clause which purportedly gave the Defendant the right to terminate the lease. Jeff represented the Claimant and successfully obtained judgment for the rent arrears against the Defendant.

Regency (UK) Ltd v Albu-Swalin [2019] 11 WLUK 278
High Court (QBD)
Mr. Justice Chamberlain
(1-day)

Jeff appeared on behalf of a tenant who had been unlawfully evicted from his property. Jeff successfully represented him before Mr Justice Chamberlain, upholding the decision at first instance. The Appellant had sought permission on grounds, inter alia, that his barrister had been negligent at trial. The Respondent was awarded his costs at the permission hearing under CPR PD 52B para.8.1.

Ali v Rayaz (2019)
County Court at Central London
HHJ Johns KC
(2-day trial)

The Claimant issued possession proceedings. The Defendant counterclaim for a declaration that the Claimant held the Property on trust him. This was a highly fact sensitive case. Jeff represented the Defendant, who was entirely successful and obtained an order that the residential property was held on trust for him. A copy of the judgment can be found [here].

Albu-Swalin -v- Regency (UK) Ltd & Heartland Limited (2019)
County Court at Central London
HHJ Luba KC
(2-day trial)

Jeff successfully represented an Iraqi refugee who had been unlawfully evicted from his flat. HHJ Luba KC awarded a total of £19,000 in general, special, aggravated and exemplary damages. The landlord was required to pay costs on an indemnity basis.

Patel -v- Sidhu (2019)
County Court at Central London
HHJ Monty KC
(1 day)

Unlawful eviction action where the leaseholder had excluded the freeholder (the latter retained control of the post office within a building that had otherwise been demised to the leaseholder). Jeff successfully obtained injunctive relief, with the substantive claim eventually settled following the leaseholder’s agreement to surrender the commercial lease.

Carter v Bristoe (2019)
County Court at Central London
HHJ Luba KC
(2-day trial)

Jeff represented the Claimant as she sought significant damages due to the Defendant’s failure to comply with her repairing obligations as the freeholder pursuant to the terms of a long (residential) lease. In short, the Defendant neglected to undertake roof repair works until August 2017, causing nearly 10 years’ worth of damage. The Claimant claimed damages in excess of £150,000. The claim was favourably settled after the first day for a significant sum.