In this Newsflash episode, Lizzie Collin sits down with Richard Snape, Head of Legal Training at Davitt Jones Bould to discuss a recent County Court decision handed down in November concerning Azam v Violet Developments LLP & Ors.Richard explains the complex background behind the dispute, involving the delayed completion of a major residential and commercial redevelopment in East London, the financial difficulties faced by the developer, and the subsequent forfeiture proceedings brought by the landlord, Mr Azam.Richard and Lizzie explore:•How the court approached relief from forfeiture under Section 146 of the Law of Property Act 1925 and the wide discretion available to judges.•Why delays in practical completion had significant financial consequences, particularly due to the introduction of the Leasehold Reform (Ground Rent) Act 2022.•The key issue of whether compensation could extend to losses not expressly mentioned in the s146 notice.•How earlier authorities such as Hyman v Rose, Southern Depot v British Railways Board, and others shaped the court’s conclusion.•Lessons for landlords, tenants, developers and lenders in managing development obligations, delayed projects, and forfeiture risk.The judgment, resulting in an award of approximately £1.4 million in compensation, illustrates the scope of the court’s discretion and highlights the importance of drafting, timing and strategic decision-making in property development arrangements.Other cases mentioned: - Hyman v Rose [1912]- Southern Depot v British Railways Board [1990]Training & Free Webinars for Property Professionals:Would you like to keep up to date with the latest in real estate law? Davitt Jones Bould offers legal training tailored to your organisation’s needs, delivered in person across the UK or remotely. We also run free monthly webinars through for surveyors, solicitors, and property professionals across sectors. To sign up or learn more, visit our events page here or email [email protected] for information and booking.This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Davitt Jones Bould for any reliance placed on its content.Get in touch!

Ask this episode

“What did the council decide on item 42?” — answered with the speaker and the moment.