Andrew's experience in his fields of business and property work allows him to examine, advise upon and conduct claims where professional negligence issues arise. The areas of his expertise in easements and covenant law lead him to being instructed where there may have been negligence by professional advisers, such as counsel, solicitors, surveyors and valuers.

The main areas of Andrew’s expertise in the law of real property are restrictive covenants affecting freehold land, rights of light, rights of way and other easements, adverse possession, boundaries and party walls. His publications (see below) on the first three topics demonstrate his very high degree of knowledge and experience in these three fields. These are very much “niche” areas of work in which he pre-eminent as a barrister.

In view of his standing he may be asked to advise as a “single joint expert” for all parties.  He will also act either as the mediator. or be instructed as counsel for the parties in ADR.  His recent experience is in view of modern practice, that many parties engage in “informal” ADR such as without prejudice, lawyers only, meetings.  He is frequently advising on this means of settling disputes and encourages his instructing solicitors and clients to engage in constructive ADR.  He is acutely conscious of the burden of legal and other fees in any litigation.  When acting under Direct Access instructions he is particularly keen to impress upon his clients the need to approach disputes this way wherever possible.

As will be seen below, his main area of work includes a number of specific fields of law and some additional arcane ones such as Reverters of title under the School Sites Acts.

Whilst not an expert on planning and public law matters (and he frequently encourages the use of counsel where that is needed) Andrew is familiar with the general law of Town and Country planning and public law rules to development of land and buildings and changes of use.  He is also experienced in cases where private law rights are the potential subject of being overridden under s. 203 Housing and Planning Act 2016 and similar legislation. This is particularly relevant in rights of light matters.

It goes without saying that even where there is no dispute, his skill as a draftsman of documents used in property matters reflects his long experience in this area of law and goes with his standing at the Chancery Bar.

He was a member of the Law Commission’s Advisory Board on the reform of the law of easements and covenants which led to the Report and draft Bill published in June 2011. He was also a member of the Law Commission’s Advisory Board which examined the reform of rights of light and remedies for their breach, which led to the Report and draft Bill published in December 2014.

He has considerable and very recent experience both as an adviser and as an advocate in Claims in Court involving covenants and easements and in Applications in the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) to discharge. or modify restrictive covenants under s. 84(1) Law of Property Act 1925. He also has experience where disputes over restrictive covenants require a single Judge to decide them under different jurisdictions under the “double-hatting” procedure.

His work also includes advice and advocacy in registered land disputes, in the First-tier Tribunal, Property Chamber and in the County Court and the High Court and in the higher Courts on matters such as covenants, boundaries, easements, adverse possession and other title issues.

As much of his work is either non-contentious, or if contentious, the dispute settles, his expertise is often not in the public domain. Because of his long experience in covenant and rights of light cases, he has a comprehensive knowledge of City Centres (London, Leeds, Manchester etc.) and their buildings and other locations, such as residential estates, both as regards the present and their history in terms of development. This means that he can recognise locations where either he has worked before (often spotting potential conflicts of interest) or where Courts and Tribunals have decided cases affecting those locations in the past.

Finally, much of Andrew’s work is non-contentious, such as where he is asked to advise on covenants, easments and other issues for clients who need pre-contract advice, lenders, developers who need certainty on the effect of their proposals on third party rights and insurance indemnity policies.

Specific areas of expertise in his property work.

There are four main specialist areas.
These are:-

• Covenants.
• Easements.
• Boundaries and Land Registration matters.
• Party Walls.

(1) Covenants.

As stated above, within the field of restrictive covenants affecting freehold land, he has specific expertise in disputes over the enforceability of restrictive covenants and claims to enforce them in Court. His work includes applications to discharge or modify such covenants in the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) under s. 84(1) Law of Property Act 1925. In this, he has long-standing and strong professional links with expert surveyors, valuers and town planning consultants who may be expert witnesses in these disputes.

He advises on the validity and enforceability of trading covenants within Chapters I and II of the Competition Act 1998 and under the principles relating to unlawful restraint of trade.

When instructed in matters relating to restrictive covenants and other property rights and obligations, he works closely with the specialist Indemnity Insurance market, where he is asked to advise, and in contested claims, represent the insurer or the insured. In many other cases, he will advise insurers and brokers on the risk of claims before Indemnity Policies are issued. Finally, his advice is often used (on a non-reliance basis) by clients who are seeking indemnity insurance for covenants and other risks to ensure that the development is marketable.

(2) Easements.

The same involvement applies in rights of light matters where the rights of light surveyors are critical in assessing losses.  In this area of practice he has long-standing and strong professional links with expert surveyors, valuers and town planning consultants who may be expert witnesses in these disputes.

As is the case with his work in covenants matters he works closely with the specialist Indemnity Insurance market, where he is asked to advise, and in contested claims, represent the insurer or the insured. In many other cases, he will advise insurers and brokers on the risk of claims before Indemnity Policies are issued. Finally, his advice is often used (on a non-reliance basis) by clients who are seeking indemnity insurance for rights of light and other risks to ensure that the development is marketable.

(3) Boundaries etc.

Both advisory and contentious work where boundaries, title ownership such as adverse possession issues and other matters where specialist knowledge of the land registration system is required is a significant part of Andrew’s practice. 

(4) Party Walls.

Andrew’s experience in Party Wall work is well established.  As a long-standing member of the Pyramus and Thisbe Society for many years (this being the learned Society which brings together many specialists of all professions engaged in Party Wall and related matters) he has an extensive knowledge of this technical area of property law. 

Generally.

In these and all his other cases, his key aim is to ensure good teamwork with the client and all those engaged on the client’s behalf, whatever their role.

Decided Cases.

Fenech v Hambridge Investments Ltd. [2025]. The County Court at Central London, HHJ Dight CBE, 18^th February 2025.  Judgment in claim to enforce restrictive covenants over Defendant’s development site.  The judgment deals with declaratory relief about the enforceability of the covenants, the remedy of the injunction for the breach and (obiter) the assessment of damages in lieu if the injunction restraining the further work on the development was not properly granted.  The judgment contains observations on how covenants can bind the owners of the burdened land, even if they are not expressly noted on the register of title to that land.

Gow-Wright v Law & Ors. [2024] B&PCt. (Ch D). Declaration granted under s. 84(2) Law of Property Act 1925 declaring restrictive covenants (which would otherwise have impeded the development of the Claimants land) unenforceable by virtue of the absence of any evidence of their benefit to defined or ascertainable land. Bath Rugby Ltd. v Greenwood & Ors. [2022] (Court of Appeal) applied.

Kay v Cunningham & Nix [2023] UKUT (LC). Application to modify user covenant to allow limited use of historic mansion house in rural Derbyshire for bed and breakfast accommodation, with consideration of the effect of “nuisance and annoyance” covenant remaining unmodified as outside the Application.

Collins v Howell. [2022] UKUT 72 (LC). This was an Application to modify a restrictive covenant under s. 84(1)(aa) Law of Property Act 1925, to enable a manège (sand school for horse riders) to be built on a field in rural Devon. The Application was refused because the manège would interfere with the Objectors’ enjoyment of their view over the field. This was also a case where the County Court Claim made by the Objectors for an injunction, which was stayed pending the determination of the s. 84(1) Application, was heard at the same time as the hearing of the latter under the “double hatting” procedure. This is an important case not only as an example of the effective use of the latter procedure, but also because it shows that even in rural areas, restrictive covenants have as much potential importance as in built-up areas, suburbs and high-class estates.

Moskofian v Foster & Ors. [2021] UKUT 214 (LC). The application to modify a restrictive covenant over land at Ealing, West London, under s. 84(1)(aa) Law of Property Act 1925, allowed on terms as to payment of compensation to the Objectors and to regulate one aspect of the implementation of the proposed development.

Father’s Field Developments Ltd. v Namulas Pension Trustees Ltd. [2021] UKUT 169 (LC). The application to modify a restrictive covenant over land at Earls Colne, Essex, under s. 84(1)(aa) Law of Property Act 1925, allowed without the payment of any compensation to the Objector. The Tribunal rejected the Objector’s case that compensation under this jurisdiction could be awarded on the “negotiating damages” or “release fee” basis under s. 84(1)(i) of that Act and it found that the evidence did not support compensation based on s. 84(1)(ii) thereof. That was so, even where the parties to the application were the original covenanting parties, the covenant was only 20 years old and it was a qualified one.

The Incorporated Trustees of the Congregation of the Holy Spirit and the Immaculate Heart of Mary (British Province) v Antill & Anor. [2020] EWHC 3466 (Ch) (High Court. Business and Property Courts of England and Wales.) Declarations as to the non-enforceability of restrictive covenants affecting freehold land in Bromley imposed before and after the commencement of Law of Property Act 1925.

Briant v Baldacchino [2020]. (Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber)). The application to modify restrictive covenant over land at Wimborne, Dorset, was refused where the importance of the effect of different planning consents on the application land and their impact on the objector’s property was stressed.

The interface between restrictive covenants over land in England and Wales which restrict competition and the Competition Act 2008 requires Andrew’s advice to be sought on such covenants. These covenants may be void under the relevant law now in force since 6th April 2011. His advice is regularly sought where the validity of covenants restrictive of trading in shopping centres and out of town “super store” sites is being considered. His consideration of the ECJ decision in Groupement des cartes bancaires (September 2014) as applicable to land agreements potentially within Chapter I Competition Act 1998 has been published in the European Law Reporter (2014 no. 12). Competition law and the effect of that law on land covenants in England and Wales has not been changed to any real extent post BREXIT. Chapter 21 in the current (5^th) edition of Andrew’s book on restrictive covenants (see below under publications) deals with this aspect of land law.

Within this heading Andrew advises upon and is the advocate in the hearing of disputes referred to above. His long experience at the Bar means that his knowledge of some arcane and less frequently encountered aspects of property law, such as unregistered titles and their conveyancing, settlements and trusts of land (eg. under the Settled Land Act 1925) and other unusual issues which can still arise, is invaluable.  He has considerable experience in cases engaging the School Sites Acts and similar “reverter” legislation where the future use of land within those rules may be critical to the community in which the land is situated.